M J C van Treijen1,2, J M H Schoevers3, B C Heeres4,5, D van der Zee6, M Maas4,5, G D Valk3,4, M E T Tesselaar4,7. 1. Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.j.c.vantreijen@umcutrecht.nl. 2. The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.j.c.vantreijen@umcutrecht.nl. 3. Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. The Netherlands Cancer Institute/University Medical Center Utrecht Center for Neuroendocrine Tumors, ENETs Center of Excellence, Amsterdam/Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Radiology, Bernhoven Hospital, Uden, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Adequate monitoring of changes in tumor load is fundamental for the assessment of the course of disease and response to treatment. There is an ongoing debate on the utility of RECIST v1.1 in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). METHODS: In this retrospective real-life cohort study, Choi-criteria were compared with RECIST v1.1. The agreement between both criteria and the association with survival endpoints were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included with a median follow-up of 35 months (range 8-53). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) according to RECIST v1.1 was 15 months (range 2-50) compared to 14 months (range 2-50) in Choi. According to RECIST, 33 (44%) patients were classified as having stable disease (SD), 40 (53%) as progressive disease (PD) and two (3%) patients as partial response (PR), compared to 9 (12%) patients classified as SD, 50 (67%) as PD and 16 (21%) as PR according to Choi-criteria. Overall concordance between the criteria was moderate (Cohen's Kappa = 0.408, p < 0.001) and agreement varied between 57 and 69% at each consecutive scan (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed significant differences in overall survival (OS) for RECIST v1.1 categories PD and non-PD (log-rank p = 0.02), however, in Choi no significant differences in OS were found (p = 0.27). CONCLUSION: RECIST v1.1 had a better clinical utility and prognostic value compared to Choi-criteria. Still, RECIST were also not sufficient to adequately predict OS. This outlines the need for new tools that provides accurate information on the disease course and treatment response to support precise prognostication in patients with GEP-NETs.
PURPOSE: Adequate monitoring of changes in tumor load is fundamental for the assessment of the course of disease and response to treatment. There is an ongoing debate on the utility of RECIST v1.1 in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). METHODS: In this retrospective real-life cohort study, Choi-criteria were compared with RECIST v1.1. The agreement between both criteria and the association with survival endpoints were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included with a median follow-up of 35 months (range 8-53). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) according to RECIST v1.1 was 15 months (range 2-50) compared to 14 months (range 2-50) in Choi. According to RECIST, 33 (44%) patients were classified as having stable disease (SD), 40 (53%) as progressive disease (PD) and two (3%) patients as partial response (PR), compared to 9 (12%) patients classified as SD, 50 (67%) as PD and 16 (21%) as PR according to Choi-criteria. Overall concordance between the criteria was moderate (Cohen's Kappa = 0.408, p < 0.001) and agreement varied between 57 and 69% at each consecutive scan (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed significant differences in overall survival (OS) for RECIST v1.1 categories PD and non-PD (log-rank p = 0.02), however, in Choi no significant differences in OS were found (p = 0.27). CONCLUSION: RECIST v1.1 had a better clinical utility and prognostic value compared to Choi-criteria. Still, RECIST were also not sufficient to adequately predict OS. This outlines the need for new tools that provides accurate information on the disease course and treatment response to support precise prognostication in patients with GEP-NETs.
Authors: Anders Sundin; Rudolf Arnold; Eric Baudin; Jaroslaw B Cwikla; Barbro Eriksson; Stefano Fanti; Nicola Fazio; Francesco Giammarile; Rodney J Hicks; Andreas Kjaer; Eric Krenning; Dik Kwekkeboom; Catherine Lombard-Bohas; Juan M O'Connor; Dermot O'Toole; Andrea Rockall; Bertram Wiedenmann; Juan W Valle; Marie-Pierre Vullierme Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 4.914
Authors: Clarisse Dromain; Thierry de Baere; Jean Lumbroso; Hubert Caillet; Agnès Laplanche; Valerie Boige; Michel Ducreux; Pierre Duvillard; Dominique Elias; Martin Schlumberger; Robert Sigal; Eric Baudin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Arvind Dasari; Chan Shen; Daniel Halperin; Bo Zhao; Shouhao Zhou; Ying Xu; Tina Shih; James C Yao Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Mark J C van Treijen; Dennis van der Zee; Birthe C Heeres; Femke C R Staal; Menno R Vriens; Lisette J Saveur; Wieke H M Verbeek; Catharina M Korse; Monique Maas; Gerlof D Valk; Margot E T Tesselaar Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2020-06-03 Impact factor: 4.914