| Literature DB >> 34581627 |
Robbert S Puijk1, Muneeb Ahmed1, Andreas Adam1, Yasuaki Arai1, Ronald Arellano1, Thierry de Baère1, Reto Bale1, Carine Bellera1, Christoph A Binkert1, Christopher L Brace1, David J Breen1, Elias Brountzos1, Matthew R Callstrom1, Gianpaolo Carrafiello1, Julius Chapiro1, Francesco de Cobelli1, Veerle M H Coupé1, Laura Crocetti1, Alban Denys1, Damian E Dupuy1, Joseph P Erinjeri1, Dimitris Filippiadis1, Afshin Gangi1, Debra A Gervais1, Alice R Gillams1, Tissy Greene1, Boris Guiu1, Thomas Helmberger1, Roberto Iezzi1, Tae Wook Kang1, Alexis Kelekis1, Hyun S Kim1, Thomas Kröncke1, Sharon Kwan1, Min Woo Lee1, Fred T Lee1, Edward W Lee1, Ping Liang1, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte1, David S Lu1, David C Madoff1, Giovanni Mauri1, Maria Franca Meloni1, Robert Morgan1, Gregory Nadolski1, Govindarajan Narayanan1, Isabel Newton1, Boris Nikolic1, Franco Orsi1, Philippe L Pereira1, Uei Pua1, Hyunchul Rhim1, Jens Ricke1, William Rilling1, Riad Salem1, Hester J Scheffer1, Constantinos T Sofocleous1, Luigi A Solbiati1, Stephen B Solomon1, Michael C Soulen1, Daniel Sze1, Raman Uberoi1, Thomas J Vogl1, David S Wang1, Bradford J Wood1, S Nahum Goldberg1, Martijn R Meijerink1.
Abstract
There is currently no consensus regarding preferred clinical outcome measures following image-guided tumor ablation or clear definitions of oncologic end points. This consensus document proposes standardized definitions for a broad range of oncologic outcome measures with recommendations on how to uniformly document, analyze, and report outcomes. The initiative was coordinated by the Society of Interventional Oncology in collaboration with the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-Event End Points in Cancer Trials, or DATECAN, group. According to predefined criteria, based on experience with clinical trials, an international panel of 62 experts convened. Recommendations were developed using the validated three-step modified Delphi consensus method. Consensus was reached on when to assess outcomes per patient, per session, or per tumor; on starting and ending time and survival time definitions; and on time-to-event end points. Although no consensus was reached on the preferred classification system to report complications, quality of life, and health economics issues, the panel did agree on using the most recent version of a validated patient-reported outcome questionnaire. This article provides a framework of key opinion leader recommendations with the intent to facilitate a clear interpretation of results and standardize worldwide communication. Widespread adoption will improve reproducibility, allow for accurate comparisons, and avoid misinterpretations in the field of interventional oncology research. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Liddell in this issue.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34581627 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021203715
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiology ISSN: 0033-8419 Impact factor: 11.105