Cargando…
Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602
BACKGROUND: Two standard sets of criteria are used to evaluate the tumor response of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) and modified RECIST (mRECIST). The purpose was to compare two tumor response evaluation criteria, RECIST version 1.1 and mRECIST,...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Informa Healthcare
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3572665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167460 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03009734.2012.729104 |
_version_ | 1782259340389908480 |
---|---|
author | Sato, Yozo Watanabe, Hirokazu Sone, Miyuki Onaya, Hiroaki Sakamoto, Noriaki Osuga, Keigo Takahashi, Masahide Arai, Yasuaki |
author_facet | Sato, Yozo Watanabe, Hirokazu Sone, Miyuki Onaya, Hiroaki Sakamoto, Noriaki Osuga, Keigo Takahashi, Masahide Arai, Yasuaki |
author_sort | Sato, Yozo |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Two standard sets of criteria are used to evaluate the tumor response of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) and modified RECIST (mRECIST). The purpose was to compare two tumor response evaluation criteria, RECIST version 1.1 and mRECIST, for HCC treated using transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE). METHODS: The radiological findings of patients who underwent TACE for HCCs in a multicenter clinical trial were examined. Sixty-five lesions in 21 patients treated with TACE without mixing iodized-oil were evaluated. The tumor size was evaluated by measuring the entire lesion, including the necrotic part, using RECIST version 1.1, whereas only the contrast-enhanced part observed during the arterial phase was measured using mRECIST. Five radiologists independently measured each lesion twice. To evaluate the inter-criteria reproducibility, the complete response (CR) rate, the response rate, the kappa statistics, and the proportion of agreement (PA) for response categories were calculated. The same analyses were conducted for inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. RESULTS: In the inter-criteria reproducibility study, the CR rate and the response rate obtained using mRECIST (56.9% and 79.7%) were higher than those obtained using RECIST version 1.1 (9.2% and 43.1%). In the inter- and intra-observer reproducibility study, mRECIST exhibited an ‘almost perfect agreement', while RECIST version 1.1 exhibited a ‘substantial agreement'. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable differences in the CR rate and the response rate were observed. From the viewpoint of the high inter- and intra-observer reproducibility, mRECIST may be more suitable for tumor response criteria in clinical trials of TACE for HCC. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3572665 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Informa Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35726652013-03-15 Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 Sato, Yozo Watanabe, Hirokazu Sone, Miyuki Onaya, Hiroaki Sakamoto, Noriaki Osuga, Keigo Takahashi, Masahide Arai, Yasuaki Ups J Med Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Two standard sets of criteria are used to evaluate the tumor response of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) and modified RECIST (mRECIST). The purpose was to compare two tumor response evaluation criteria, RECIST version 1.1 and mRECIST, for HCC treated using transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE). METHODS: The radiological findings of patients who underwent TACE for HCCs in a multicenter clinical trial were examined. Sixty-five lesions in 21 patients treated with TACE without mixing iodized-oil were evaluated. The tumor size was evaluated by measuring the entire lesion, including the necrotic part, using RECIST version 1.1, whereas only the contrast-enhanced part observed during the arterial phase was measured using mRECIST. Five radiologists independently measured each lesion twice. To evaluate the inter-criteria reproducibility, the complete response (CR) rate, the response rate, the kappa statistics, and the proportion of agreement (PA) for response categories were calculated. The same analyses were conducted for inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. RESULTS: In the inter-criteria reproducibility study, the CR rate and the response rate obtained using mRECIST (56.9% and 79.7%) were higher than those obtained using RECIST version 1.1 (9.2% and 43.1%). In the inter- and intra-observer reproducibility study, mRECIST exhibited an ‘almost perfect agreement', while RECIST version 1.1 exhibited a ‘substantial agreement'. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable differences in the CR rate and the response rate were observed. From the viewpoint of the high inter- and intra-observer reproducibility, mRECIST may be more suitable for tumor response criteria in clinical trials of TACE for HCC. Informa Healthcare 2013-03 2013-02-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3572665/ /pubmed/23167460 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03009734.2012.729104 Text en © Informa Healthcare http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Sato, Yozo Watanabe, Hirokazu Sone, Miyuki Onaya, Hiroaki Sakamoto, Noriaki Osuga, Keigo Takahashi, Masahide Arai, Yasuaki Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title | Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title_full | Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title_fullStr | Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title_full_unstemmed | Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title_short | Tumor response evaluation criteria for HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using TACE (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mRECIST (modified RECIST): JIVROSG-0602 |
title_sort | tumor response evaluation criteria for hcc (hepatocellular carcinoma) treated using tace (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization): recist (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) version 1.1 and mrecist (modified recist): jivrosg-0602 |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3572665/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167460 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03009734.2012.729104 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT satoyozo tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT watanabehirokazu tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT sonemiyuki tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT onayahiroaki tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT sakamotonoriaki tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT osugakeigo tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT takahashimasahide tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT araiyasuaki tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 AT tumorresponseevaluationcriteriaforhcchepatocellularcarcinomatreatedusingtacetranscatheterarterialchemoembolizationrecistresponseevaluationcriteriainsolidtumorsversion11andmrecistmodifiedrecistjivrosg0602 |