Evaluation of the response to treatment of solid tumours – a consensus statement of the International Cancer Imaging Society

Husband, Janet E.; Schwartz, Lawrence H.; Spencer, John; Ollivier, L.; King, Daniel; Johnson, Roderick J.; Reznek, Rodney H.

doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601843

Cited by 149 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the introduction of molecular-targeted therapies has emphasized the limitations of RECIST in terms of their validity, because tumor response may be nondimensional, especially in an early phase. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] In these patients, tumor response is marked by changes in the tumor radiologic aspect and in its functional imaging.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumor response assessment by modified Choi criteria in localized high‐risk soft tissue sarcoma treated with chemotherapy

Stacchiotti

Verderio²,

Messina

et al. 2012

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND. The objective of this study was to compare the prognostic relevance of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) versus Choi criteria for the assessment of response in patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities or trunk wall who received preoperative chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy in a phase 3 trial. METHODS. Patients received 3 cycles of preoperative epirubicin þ ifosfamide with or without radiotherapy. The diagnostic concordance between RECIST and Choi criteria and their correlation with overall survival (OS) and freedom from progression (FFP) were evaluated in a univariate Cox regression model. RESULTS. In 243 of 321 eligible patients, RECIST, Choi criteria, and histology were predictive for OS and FFP. In the subgroup of 69 patients who received chemotherapy alone and were evaluable by both RECIST and Choi criteria, Choi criteria were associated significantly with OS and FFP, whereas RECIST predicted only FFP, and the pattern of agreement observed between the 2 criteria was unsatisfactory. On a dichotomous scale, comparing objective response (complete and partial responses) and lack of response (stable and progressive disease) to preoperative chemotherapy according to RECIST and Choi criteria, only Choi criteria were predictive of OS and FFP, and fair agreement between RECIST and Choi criteria was observed. When lack of progression and progression were compared (complete and partial responses þ stable disease vs progressive disease), both assessment criteria were significantly predictive of OS and FFP, and there was substantial agreement between the 2 criteria. CONCLUSIONS. Response to chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy was associated with a better outcome in patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma. Choi criteria were better predictors than RECIST in patients who received preoperative chemotherapy alone. Cancer 2012;118:5857-66.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumor response assessment by modified Choi criteria in localized high‐risk soft tissue sarcoma treated with chemotherapy

Stacchiotti

Verderio²,

Messina

et al. 2012

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Были также попытки применять для определения степени патоморфоза опухоли гистологическое исследование биопсийно-го материала [27]. Однако в связи с малым количеством биопсийного материла досто-верно судить о наличии и степени патомор-фоза затруднительно.…”

Section: современные подходы к оценке пато-морфоза ржunclassified

Мorphologicaland Clinical Changes of Gastric Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy (Review of Literature)

Мозеров¹,

Komin²,

Mozerova³

et al. 2016

IJAFR (МЖПФИ)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Рак желудка -это одно из самых распространенных злокачественных новообразований человека се-годня, занимающее пятое место в структуре онкологических заболеваний и требующее безотлагательного лечения. В целях улучшения как непосредственных, так и отдаленных результатов лечения в последнее вре-мя все чаще применяется неоадъювантная лучевая и/или химиотерапия. Для исследования ее эффективно-сти, а также для выбора объема последующего вмешательства и контроля течения заболевания необходимо изучение закономерностей ответа опухоли на терапию и разработка универсальных и нозоспецифических критериев оценки лечебного патоморфоза. В статье приведены данные отечественной и зарубежной лите-ратуры, посвященной изучению патоморфоза рака желудка как показателя эффективности неоадъювантной терапии. Описаны современные методы и критерии предоперационной и послеоперационной оценки пато-морфоза рака желудка, продемонстрирована актуальность разработки схем комплексного анализа. В част-ности, подробно освещены морфологические, инструментальные и лучевые методики оценки опухолевого ответа на проводимое лечение. Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers of man today, taking the fifth place in the structure of oncological diseases and requiring immediate treatment. In order to improve both immediate and remote results of treatment in recent years neoadjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy is increasingly used. In order to study its effectiveness as well as to select the amount of subsequent intervention and control of the disease the study of patterns of tumor response to therapy and development of a universal and specifically criteria for the assessment of pathologic response are required. This article includes data of Russian and foreign literature devoted to the study of pathologic response of gastric cancer as an indicator of the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy. Modern methods and criterias for preoperative and postoperative evaluation of pathologic response of advanced gastric cancer and the relevance of the development of integrated analysis are described here. In particular, the morphological, instrumental and radiologic methods of evaluation of pathologic response are described here in details. Keywords: gastric cancer, pathologic response, chemoradiotherapy, МSCT, response assessmentРак желудка (РЖ) -это одно из самых распространенных злокачественных ново-образований человека сегодня. В 2012 году было выявлено около 952 000 новых случа-ев РЖ, что составляет 6,8 % всех диагности-рованных злокачественных опухолей [45]. Это пятое место в структуре онкологиче-ских заболеваний [44]. При этом, более 70 % случаев РЖ выявлено в развивающих-ся странах. В частности, в России распро-страненность РЖ в 2014 году составляет 95,2 на 100 000 населения [5].Высока не только распространенность данной патологии, но и связанная с ней ле-тальность. В структуре смертности от онко-логических заболеваний по всему миру РЖ занимает третье место с долей в 8,8 % [23]. В различных регионах летальность состав-ляет от 9,8 до 24 на 100 000 [45]....

show abstract

“…WHO (World Health Organization) criteria and RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) are mainly focused on the evaluation on anatomic tumor response and were initially used for hepatocellular carcinoma. [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39]. Key features of therapeutic response assessment criteria are shown in Table 12.…”

Section: Volume 11 • Issue 1 •mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversion Rate to Resectability in Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Need for Criteria Adapted to Current Therapy.

M¹

2015

Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research ArticleOpen Access IntroductionColorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide among men (incidence 21 per 100,000 and mortality rate 10 per 100,000) and the second among women (incidence 15 per 100,000 and mortality rate 8 per 100,000). In Central and Eastern Europe, the incidence is 35 per 100,000 men and 22 per 100,000 women and mortality rate 20.3 per 100,000 men and 11.7 per 100,000 women. The overall 5 year survival rate is 50-60% [1].These rather disappointing results are mainly due to (remote) secondary lesions that most commonly affect the liver. Liver metastases occur in approximately 50% of all patients with CRC and represent the main cause of death. They are present in 15-25% of patients at the time of diagnosis [2][3][4].Despite the recent progress in the multi-disciplinary treatment for stage IV CRC, the 5-year survival is only 6% However, the survival rate has improved considering that 10 years ago, stage IV CRC was associated with a 5-year survival of less than 1% [5].Surgical treatment -the resection of metastases -remains the only curative treatment for CRLM. The complete resection of all liver metastases improves the overall survival from 25% (R1) to 40% (R0) [4,6]. Granting all this, the relapse / recurrence rate after curative liver resections remains high, ranging from 50% to 70% [7 ].These fluctuations in survival rate are mainly related to the selection of the indications for liver resection. The benefits are due to the imaging techniques, which offer a better choice of surgical procedures. Also, the development of other complementary techniques (portal vein embolization, thermoablation) and oncological therapies (chemotherapy, molecular therapy) have increased patient eligibility AbstractBackground: Therapeutic strategy for patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is based on good monitoring and correct assignment to classes of liver resectability based on imaging criteria, taking into account the surgical risk.Objective: To identify the post-treatment time frame for confirming resectability (conversion to resecability) or permanent unresectability. Methods:The study is a prospective analysis based on a Scientific Protocol (Surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases) used in the Ist Surgical Oncology Unit, Regional Institute of Oncology Iaşi, Romania. Surgical treatment, oncologic treatment, response to therapy , postoperative surgical complications, were assessed at 3, 6 and 9 months after start of the study. Results:In the interval July 2012 -January 2014, 106 patients were diagnosed with CRLM. According to the classes of liver resectability the patients were divided into four groups: group I (clear resectability), group II (possibly resectability), group III (susceptible resectability), group IV (unresectable metastases). Relevant for the study were only groups II and III. Thus, in group II patients the rate of conversion to resectability was 23.07% and in group III patients 26.66%. These results were obtained after 3, 6 and ...

show abstract

Evaluation of the response to treatment of solid tumours – a consensus statement of the International Cancer Imaging Society

Cited by 149 publications

References 26 publications

Tumor response assessment by modified Choi criteria in localized high‐risk soft tissue sarcoma treated with chemotherapy

Tumor response assessment by modified Choi criteria in localized high‐risk soft tissue sarcoma treated with chemotherapy

Мorphologicaland Clinical Changes of Gastric Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy (Review of Literature)

Conversion Rate to Resectability in Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Need for Criteria Adapted to Current Therapy.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About