Measures of Response: RECIST, WHO, and New Alternatives

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (20) ◽  
pp. 3245-3251 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Carl Jaffe
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Clinical Events ◽  
Wide Acceptance ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Ready Availability

RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) is a widely employed method introduced in 2000 to assess change in tumor size in response to therapy. The simplicity of the technique, however, contrasts sharply with the increasing sophistication of imaging instrumentation. Anatomically based imaging measurement, although supportive of drug development and key to some accelerated drug approvals, is being pressed to improve its methodologic robustness, particularly in the light of more functionally-based imaging that is sensitive to tissue molecular response such as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Nevertheless ready availability of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging machines largely assures anatomically based imaging a continuing role in clinical trials for the foreseeable future. Recent advances in image processing enabled by the computational power of modern clinical scanners open a considerable opportunity to characterize tumor response to therapy as a complement to image acquisition. Various alternative quantitative volumetric approaches have been proposed but have yet to gain wide acceptance by clinical and regulatory communities, nor have these more complex techniques shown incontrovertible evidence of greater reproducibility or predictive value of clinical events and outcome. Unless plans are created for clinical trials that incorporate the design needed to prove the added value and unique clinical utility of these novel approaches, any theoretical benefit of these more elaborate methods could remain unfulfilled.

Advances in Immuno-PET in the Detection of Cancer and Assessment of Response to Therapy

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mian M. Alauddin ◽  
Leslie A. Khawli
Keyword(s):  
Half Life ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Chelating Agents ◽  
Therapeutic Response ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Immune Checkpoints ◽  
Imaging Studies ◽  
Positron Emission

Background: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against tumor-associated antigens have been shown to target tumors with specificity and selectivity; therefore, it was hypothesized that cancer could be treated with mAbs without side effects. In the early 1980s, clinical studies demonstrated that tumors could be visualized using radiolabeled mAbs. However, with the introduction of positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG), antibody-based imaging became less important because of its limited diagnostic accuracy. During the last two decades, a revival of imaging with radiolabeled mAbs has taken place, specifically PET with longer half-life isotopes. Development of immune checkpoints as targets for immunotherapy has opened opportunities for development of a wide variety of antibodies, such as anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-L1, and anti-PD1. Thus, imaging with these antibodies radiolabeled with 89Zr or another long–half-life PET isotope, known as immuno-PET, has become mainstream. Objective: To review the rapid development of immuno-PET for the detection of cancer and assessment of therapeutic response combining surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and/or immunotherapy. This review includes reports on the radiolabeling, imaging and clinical utility of 89Zr-, 64Cu-, and 124I-labeled mAbs. Results: More than 120 research and review articles on immuno-PET were reviewed. Conclusion: Many mAbs have been developed and used for treatment of cancer; however, a limited number of antibodies have been radiolabeled for immuno-PET. While much progress has been made with the therapeutic applications of mAbs, immuno-PET for diagnosis and treatment assessment needs more work. Improved chelating agents and extensive imaging studies are needed to refine immuno-PET for the diagnosis of cancers and assessment of response to therapy.

Representation of peritoneal metastases in published clinical trials of metastatic colorectal cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 725-725
Author(s):  
Jennifer Tseng ◽  
Darren S Bryan ◽  
Elizabeth Poli ◽  
Manish Sharma ◽  
Blase N. Polite ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Peritoneal Metastases ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
World Health ◽  
Peritoneal Disease ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Pubmed Search

725 Background: Peritoneal metastases occur in 6-15% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Non-invasive detection of peritoneal metastases is difficult given limitations in discrimination of cross sectional imaging. We hypothesized that patients with peritoneal metastases are underrepresented in clinical trials. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of systemic chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer between 2003-16 were included after a PubMed search. Articles were restricted to those published in leading oncology journals and with ≥100 patients (total). Protocol designs were hand searched to identify whether clinical trials explicitly included or reported on patients with peritoneal metastases. Results: Of 72 clinical trials identified, 7 (10%) studies specifically reported inclusion of peritoneal disease (Table 1). Of 45,783 patients enrolled in all trials, 670 patients (1.5%) specifically had peritoneal metastases. Response for peritoneal disease was measured using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria in 6 (of 7, 86%) and modified World Health Organization (WHO) criteria in 1 but not reported in the final manuscript or supplementary material. Peritoneal specific outcomes were not reported in any study. No studies included metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases alone. Conclusions: Patients with peritoneal metastases are underrepresented in published clinical trials. Specific efforts to include patients, measure burden of disease and response to therapy and report peritoneal specific outcomes are essential to draw generalizable inferences. [Table: see text]

A template for generic asssessment of tumor response: "myRECIST".

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14149-e14149
Author(s):  
Stephen Raskin ◽  
Tehila Kharizman ◽  
Tatyana Rachutin Zalogin ◽  
Aliza Ackerstein ◽  
Eli Konen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Tumor Response ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Limited Sample ◽  
Recist 1.1 ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Practice Methods

e14149 Background: Oncologists often need an objective, quantitative assessment of a patient's response to therapy. Lacking a standardized format, the oncologist may request a RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) analysis. RECIST, however, was developed to provide standardized assessment in the context of randomized clinical trials. RECIST is based on the prospective analysis of a limited sample of tumor lesions or lymph nodes, whereas the clinician naturally makes clinical decisions retrospectively. Furthermore, RECIST has definitions, rules, and criteria for classifying responses that may not apply in the clinical setting, and it does not include consistent rules for merging or splitting lymph nodes, mixed tumor responses, lesions that may cavitate, and a wide range of individualistic responses encountered in clinical practice. Methods: To address these issues, we have modified our working Excel-based template for RECIST 1.1 assessment to include a "myRECIST" feature, so that the radiologist can enter data and examine a range of pre-defined or customizable scenarios, including RECIST1.1, iRECIST, Lugano, volumetric and other parametric protocols. With a few interactions, this template can produce exportable tables and graphs of tumor responses that can guide therapy, as shown in the attached image. Definitions are standardized and linked to RADLEX ontology for specificity and subsequent analysis. Results: This template has been developed for clinical use and is available for downloading from our institutional web-site. Conclusions: We have developed, for public use, a free, easy-to-use, down-loadable Excel template for evaluating prospective or retrospective scenarios of tumor response to therapy that avoids the restrictions of the RECIST methodology. This template may prove useful to oncologists both in and out of the context of randomized clinical trials. We call this "myRECIST."

PD-L1 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (15) ◽  
pp. 1558-1565
Author(s):  
Matteo Santoni ◽  
Francesco Massari ◽  
Liang Cheng ◽  
Alessia Cimadamore ◽  
Marina Scarpelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
T Lymphocytes ◽  
Chronic Inflammation ◽  
Immune Cells ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Complex Series

The carcinogenesis of prostate cancer (PCa) results from a complex series of events. Chronic inflammation and infections are crucial in this context. Infiltrating M2 type macrophages, as well as neutrophils and T lymphocytes, contribute to PCa development, progression and response to therapy. The preliminary findings on the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with PCa were not encouraging. However, a series of studies investigating anti-PD-L1 agents such as Atezolizumab, Avelumab and Durvalumab used alone or in combination with other immunotherapies, chemotherapy or locoregional approaches are in course in this tumor. In this review, we illustrate the role of immune cells and PD-L1 expression during PCa carcinogenesis and progression, with a focus on ongoing clinical trials on anti-PD-L1 agents in this context.

scholarly journals Imaging Assessment of Tumor Response in the Era of Immunotherapy

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1041
Author(s):  
Jun Nakata ◽  
Kayako Isohashi ◽  
Yoshihiro Oka ◽  
Hiroko Nakajima ◽  
Soyoko Morimoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Tumor Response ◽  
Metabolic Response ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Response Criteria ◽  
Positron Emission

Assessment of tumor response during treatment is one of the most important purposes of imaging. Before the appearance of immunotherapy, response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) and positron emission tomography response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST) were, respectively, the established morphologic and metabolic response criteria, and cessation of treatment was recommended when progressive disease was detected according to these criteria. However, various types of immunotherapy have been developed over the past 20 years, which show novel false positive findings on images, as well as distinct response patterns from conventional therapies. Antitumor immune response itself causes 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in tumor sites, known as “flare phenomenon”, so that positron emission tomography using FDG can no longer accurately identify remaining tumors. Furthermore, tumors often initially increase, followed by stability or decrease resulting from immunotherapy, which is called “pseudoprogression”, so that progressive disease cannot be confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging at a single time point. As a result, neither RECIST nor PERCIST can accurately predict the response to immunotherapy, and therefore several new response criteria fixed for immunotherapy have been proposed. However, these criteria are still controversial, and also require months for response confirmation. The establishment of optimal response criteria and the development of new imaging technologies other than FDG are therefore urgently needed. In this review, we summarize the false positive images and the revision of response criteria for each immunotherapy, in order to avoid discontinuation of a truly effective immunotherapy.

Clinical utility of positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and management of periampullary neoplasms

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 799-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew F. Kalady ◽  
Bryan M. Clary ◽  
Lisa A. Clark ◽  
Marcia Gottfried ◽  
Eric M. Rohren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Diagnosis And Management ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Periampullary Neoplasms

scholarly journals Voxelwise Principal Component Analysis of Dynamic [S-Methyl-11C]Methionine PET Data in Glioma Patients

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 2342
Author(s):  
Corentin Martens ◽  
Olivier Debeir ◽  
Christine Decaestecker ◽  
Thierry Metens ◽  
Laetitia Lebrun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Component Analysis ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Time Activity ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Activity Curve ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Time ◽  
Met Pet

Recent works have demonstrated the added value of dynamic amino acid positron emission tomography (PET) for glioma grading and genotyping, biopsy targeting, and recurrence diagnosis. However, most of these studies are based on hand-crafted qualitative or semi-quantitative features extracted from the mean time activity curve within predefined volumes. Voxelwise dynamic PET data analysis could instead provide a better insight into intra-tumor heterogeneity of gliomas. In this work, we investigate the ability of principal component analysis (PCA) to extract relevant quantitative features from a large number of motion-corrected [S-methyl-11C]methionine ([11C]MET) PET frames. We first demonstrate the robustness of our methodology to noise by means of numerical simulations. We then build a PCA model from dynamic [11C]MET acquisitions of 20 glioma patients. In a distinct cohort of 13 glioma patients, we compare the parametric maps derived from our PCA model to these provided by the classical one-compartment pharmacokinetic model (1TCM). We show that our PCA model outperforms the 1TCM to distinguish characteristic dynamic uptake behaviors within the tumor while being less computationally expensive and not requiring arterial sampling. Such methodology could be valuable to assess the tumor aggressiveness locally with applications for treatment planning and response evaluation. This work further supports the added value of dynamic over static [11C]MET PET in gliomas.

Influence of Baseline Positron Emission Tomography in Metastatic Gastroesophageal Cancer on Survival and Response to Therapy

Oncology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Ahmed Abdelhakeem ◽  
Madhavi Patnana ◽  
Xuemei Wang ◽  
Jane E. Rogers ◽  
Mariela Blum Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Gastroesophageal Cancer ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Metastatic Burden

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The value of baseline fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) remains uncertain once gastroesophageal cancer is metastatic. We hypothesized that assessment of detailed PET-CT parameters (maximum standardized uptake value [SUVmax] and/or total lesion glycolysis [TLG]), and the extent of metastatic burden could aid prediction of probability of response or prognosticate. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively analyzed treatment-naive patients with stage 4 gastroesophageal cancer (December 2002–August 2017) who had initial PET-CT for cancer staging at MD Anderson Cancer Center. SUVmax and TLG were compared with treatment outcomes for the full cohort and subgroups based on metastatic burden (≤2 or &#x3e;2 metastatic sites). <b><i>Results:</i></b> We identified 129 patients with metastatic gastroesophageal cancer who underwent PET-CT before first-line therapy. The median follow-up time was 61 months. The median overall survival (OS) was 18.5 months; the first progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.5 months. SUVmax or TLG of the primary tumor or of all metastases combined had no influence on OS or PFS, whether the number of metastases was ≤2 or &#x3e;2. Overall response rates (ORRs) to first-line therapy were 48% and 45% for patients with ≤2 and &#x3e;2 metastases, respectively (nonsignificant). ORR did not differ based on low or high values of SUVmax or TLG. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This is the first assessment of a unique set of PET-CT data and its association with outcomes in metastatic gastroesophageal cancer. In our large cohort of patients, detailed analyses of PET-CT (by SUVmax and/or TLG) did not discriminate any parameters examined. Thus, baseline PET-CT in untreated metastatic gastroesophageal cancer patients has limited or no utility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document