Samuel G Armato1, Anna K Nowak2. 1. Department of Radiology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: s-armato@uchicago.edu. 2. Medical School and National Centre for Asbestos Related Diseases, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia and Department of Medical Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Malignant pleural mesothelioma poses unique difficulties in tumor measurement and response assessment; however, robust and reproducible assessment of response is critically important in the conduct, interpretation, and reporting of clinical trials. METHODS: The current de facto standard for the assessment of mesothelioma tumor response, "modified RECIST" (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), was published in 2004 as a research paper. Practical application of the modified RECIST guidelines has suffered from varied interpretations, resulting in inaccuracies and inconsistencies in tumor response assessment across and within mesothelioma clinical trials. The presented "modified RECIST 1.1 for mesothelioma" response assessment guidelines provide a much-needed update that incorporates recommendations from RECIST 1.1 and approaches to other practical issues, including: (1) definition of minimally measurable disease; (2) definition of measurable lesions; (3) acceptable measurement location; (4) non-pleural disease considerations; (5) characterization of non-measurable pleural disease; (6) assessment of pathological lymph nodes; (7) establishing progressive disease; and (8) accommodations for bilateral pleural disease. RESULTS: These modified RECIST 1.1 guidelines for mesothelioma tumor response collate and apply research published since the development of modified RECIST, align modified RECIST with RECIST 1.1, address those aspects of tumor measurement that were neglected or not well characterized in the modified RECIST paper, and clarify ambiguous or difficult measurement issues that have been highlighted through the subsequent decade of clinical trials research. CONCLUSION: Adoption of the modified RECIST 1.1 guidelines for mesothelioma is recommended to harmonize the application of tumor measurement and response assessment across the next generation of clinical trials in this disease.
INTRODUCTION:Malignant pleural mesothelioma poses unique difficulties in tumor measurement and response assessment; however, robust and reproducible assessment of response is critically important in the conduct, interpretation, and reporting of clinical trials. METHODS: The current de facto standard for the assessment of mesothelioma tumor response, "modified RECIST" (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), was published in 2004 as a research paper. Practical application of the modified RECIST guidelines has suffered from varied interpretations, resulting in inaccuracies and inconsistencies in tumor response assessment across and within mesothelioma clinical trials. The presented "modified RECIST 1.1 for mesothelioma" response assessment guidelines provide a much-needed update that incorporates recommendations from RECIST 1.1 and approaches to other practical issues, including: (1) definition of minimally measurable disease; (2) definition of measurable lesions; (3) acceptable measurement location; (4) non-pleural disease considerations; (5) characterization of non-measurable pleural disease; (6) assessment of pathological lymph nodes; (7) establishing progressive disease; and (8) accommodations for bilateral pleural disease. RESULTS: These modified RECIST 1.1 guidelines for mesothelioma tumor response collate and apply research published since the development of modified RECIST, align modified RECIST with RECIST 1.1, address those aspects of tumor measurement that were neglected or not well characterized in the modified RECIST paper, and clarify ambiguous or difficult measurement issues that have been highlighted through the subsequent decade of clinical trials research. CONCLUSION: Adoption of the modified RECIST 1.1 guidelines for mesothelioma is recommended to harmonize the application of tumor measurement and response assessment across the next generation of clinical trials in this disease.
Authors: Sebastian Curcean; Lin Cheng; Simona Picchia; Nina Tunariu; David Collins; Matthew Blackledge; Sanjay Popat; Mary O'Brien; Anna Minchom; Martin O Leach; Dow-Mu Koh Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-11-02
Authors: Bolin Chen; Min Yang; Kang Li; Jia Li; Li Xu; Fang Xu; Yan Xu; Dandan Ren; Jiao Zhang; Liyu Liu Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 3.111
Authors: E Nadal; J de Castro-Carpeño; J Bosch-Barrera; S Cedrés; J Coves; R García-Campelo; M Guirado; R López-Castro; A L Ortega; D Vicente Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 3.340
Authors: Prasad S Adusumilli; Marjorie G Zauderer; Isabelle Rivière; Stephen B Solomon; Valerie W Rusch; Roisin E O'Cearbhaill; Amy Zhu; Waseem Cheema; Navin K Chintala; Elizabeth Halton; John Pineda; Rocio Perez-Johnston; Kay See Tan; Bobby Daly; Jose A Araujo Filho; Daniel Ngai; Erin McGee; Alain Vincent; Claudia Diamonte; Jennifer L Sauter; Shanu Modi; Devanjan Sikder; Brigitte Senechal; Xiuyan Wang; William D Travis; Mithat Gönen; Charles M Rudin; Renier J Brentjens; David R Jones; Michel Sadelain Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 39.397