PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, the immune RECIST (iRECIST) criteria, and the Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) 1.0 in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death protein 1 ligand (PD-L1) inhibitors. METHODS: This prospective study of 42 patients treated with a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor was approved by our institutional review board, and all patients gave written, informed consent. Tumor burden dynamics were assessed on F-FDG PET/CT before and after treatment initiation. Immunotherapeutic responses were evaluated according to RECIST 1.1, iRECIST, and PERCIST 1.0 for the dichotomous groups, responders versus nonresponders. Cohen κ and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to evaluate concordance among these criteria. We assessed progression-free survival and overall survival using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. RESULTS: The RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0 response classifications were discordant in 6 patients (14.2%; κ = 0.581). RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST were discordant in 2 patients, who evidenced pseudoprogression after treatment initiation. Median progression-free survival, as well as overall survival, was significantly longer for responders compared with nonresponders for all criteria (P < 0.001), with no significant difference between the 3 criteria (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0 show only moderate agreement, but both can predict treatment response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy. In case of pseudoprogression, metabolic tumor activity may help to correctly classify treatment response.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, the immune RECIST (iRECIST) criteria, and the Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) 1.0 in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death protein 1 ligand (PD-L1) inhibitors. METHODS: This prospective study of 42 patients treated with a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor was approved by our institutional review board, and all patients gave written, informed consent. Tumor burden dynamics were assessed on F-FDG PET/CT before and after treatment initiation. Immunotherapeutic responses were evaluated according to RECIST 1.1, iRECIST, and PERCIST 1.0 for the dichotomous groups, responders versus nonresponders. Cohen κ and Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to evaluate concordance among these criteria. We assessed progression-free survival and overall survival using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. RESULTS: The RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0 response classifications were discordant in 6 patients (14.2%; κ = 0.581). RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST were discordant in 2 patients, who evidenced pseudoprogression after treatment initiation. Median progression-free survival, as well as overall survival, was significantly longer for responders compared with nonresponders for all criteria (P < 0.001), with no significant difference between the 3 criteria (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST 1.0 show only moderate agreement, but both can predict treatment response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor therapy. In case of pseudoprogression, metabolic tumor activity may help to correctly classify treatment response.
Authors: Firas S Ahmed; Laurent Dercle; Gregory V Goldmacher; Hao Yang; Dana Connors; Ying Tang; Sanja Karovic; Binsheng Zhao; Richard D Carvajal; Caroline Robert; Michael L Maitland; Geoffrey R Oxnard; Lawrence H Schwartz Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 7.034
Authors: Kelly E Henry; Kyeara N Mack; Veronica L Nagle; Mike Cornejo; Adam O Michel; Ian L Fox; Maria Davydova; Thomas R Dilling; Nagavarakishore Pillarsetty; Jason S Lewis Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2021-08-04 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Lena M Mittlmeier; Matthias Brendel; Leonie Beyer; Nathalie L Albert; Andrei Todica; Mathias J Zacherl; Vera Wenter; Annika Herlemann; Alexander Kretschmer; Stephan T Ledderose; Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann; Wolfgang G Kunz; Jens Ricke; Peter Bartenstein; Harun Ilhan; Marcus Unterrainer Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Harriet M Kluger; Hussein A Tawbi; Maria L Ascierto; Michaela Bowden; Margaret K Callahan; Edward Cha; Helen X Chen; Charles G Drake; David M Feltquate; Robert L Ferris; James L Gulley; Shilpa Gupta; Rachel W Humphrey; Theresa M LaVallee; Dung T Le; Vanessa M Hubbard-Lucey; Vassiliki A Papadimitrakopoulou; Michael A Postow; Eric H Rubin; Elad Sharon; Janis M Taube; Suzanne L Topalian; Roberta Zappasodi; Mario Sznol; Ryan J Sullivan Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 13.751