Cargando…
Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST?
INTRODUCTION: Metronomic chemotherapy (MC) is a novel therapeutic variation for resistant cancers, wherein chemotherapeutic drugs are administrated in low doses with no prolonged drug-free break. It lessens the level of toxicity, is better tolerated and enhances the quality of life. This retrospecti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996775/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24761057 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-3919.130285 |
_version_ | 1782313094528106496 |
---|---|
author | Agrawal, Archi Purandare, Nilendu Shah, Sneha Puranik, Ameya Banavali, Shripad Rangarajan, Venkatesh |
author_facet | Agrawal, Archi Purandare, Nilendu Shah, Sneha Puranik, Ameya Banavali, Shripad Rangarajan, Venkatesh |
author_sort | Agrawal, Archi |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Metronomic chemotherapy (MC) is a novel therapeutic variation for resistant cancers, wherein chemotherapeutic drugs are administrated in low doses with no prolonged drug-free break. It lessens the level of toxicity, is better tolerated and enhances the quality of life. This retrospective analysis was undertaken to evaluate whether anatomical (computed tomography [CT]) or functional (positron emission tomography [PET]) imaging be used for response assessment in patients on MC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 16 males and 27 females with age range of 12-83 years on MC who underwent PET/CT were assessed by new response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1) and PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST 1.0). RESULTS: Concordance between RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST was seen in 32 (75%) patients. There was discordance in 11 (25%) patients. In patients with discordance, the results were confirmed by follow-up imaging. PET upstaged the disease in 81% of patients (9/11) and down-staged the disease in 19% of patients (2/11). CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic response accurately identified the disease status as assessed by clinical or imaging follow-up. Alteration in morphology takes time to manifest, which is demonstrated by CT or magnetic resonance; whereas in MC which brings about tumor dormancy, assessing metabolic response by PET would be more appropriate. MC is usually given in palliative setting but in few cases complete metabolic response was demonstrated in our study. In such a scenario this form of treatment has the potential to become an adjunct mode of treatment in some tumors. This needs to be evaluated with larger, homogenous patient population in a prospective mode. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3996775 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39967752014-04-23 Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? Agrawal, Archi Purandare, Nilendu Shah, Sneha Puranik, Ameya Banavali, Shripad Rangarajan, Venkatesh Indian J Nucl Med Original Article INTRODUCTION: Metronomic chemotherapy (MC) is a novel therapeutic variation for resistant cancers, wherein chemotherapeutic drugs are administrated in low doses with no prolonged drug-free break. It lessens the level of toxicity, is better tolerated and enhances the quality of life. This retrospective analysis was undertaken to evaluate whether anatomical (computed tomography [CT]) or functional (positron emission tomography [PET]) imaging be used for response assessment in patients on MC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 16 males and 27 females with age range of 12-83 years on MC who underwent PET/CT were assessed by new response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1) and PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST 1.0). RESULTS: Concordance between RECIST 1.1 and PERCIST was seen in 32 (75%) patients. There was discordance in 11 (25%) patients. In patients with discordance, the results were confirmed by follow-up imaging. PET upstaged the disease in 81% of patients (9/11) and down-staged the disease in 19% of patients (2/11). CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic response accurately identified the disease status as assessed by clinical or imaging follow-up. Alteration in morphology takes time to manifest, which is demonstrated by CT or magnetic resonance; whereas in MC which brings about tumor dormancy, assessing metabolic response by PET would be more appropriate. MC is usually given in palliative setting but in few cases complete metabolic response was demonstrated in our study. In such a scenario this form of treatment has the potential to become an adjunct mode of treatment in some tumors. This needs to be evaluated with larger, homogenous patient population in a prospective mode. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC3996775/ /pubmed/24761057 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-3919.130285 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Agrawal, Archi Purandare, Nilendu Shah, Sneha Puranik, Ameya Banavali, Shripad Rangarajan, Venkatesh Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title | Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title_full | Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title_fullStr | Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title_full_unstemmed | Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title_short | Response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: RECIST or PERCIST? |
title_sort | response assessment in metronomic chemotherapy: recist or percist? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996775/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24761057 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-3919.130285 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT agrawalarchi responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist AT purandarenilendu responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist AT shahsneha responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist AT puranikameya responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist AT banavalishripad responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist AT rangarajanvenkatesh responseassessmentinmetronomicchemotherapyrecistorpercist |