Which evaluation criteria of the short-term efficacy can better reflect the long-term outcomes for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma?

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the consistency of one-dimensional Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (1D-RECIST), two-dimensional WHO criteria (2D-WHO), and three-dimensional (3D) measurement for therapeutic response assessment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Materials and methodsRetrospective data of 288 newly diagnosed NPC patients were reviewed. Tumor size was assessed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) according to the 1D-RECIST, 2D-WHO, and 3D measurement criteria. Agreement between tumor responses was assessed using unweighted k statistics. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cut-off point of the PTV. The Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression were used for the survival analysis. ResultsThe optimal cut-off point of the PTV for progression-free survival (PFS) was 29.6%. Agreement with PTV measurement was better for 1D measurement than for 2D and 3D measurements (kappa values of 0.646, 0.537, and 0.577 for 1D, 2D, and 3D measurements, respectively; P < 0.05). The area under the curve of the 1D measurement (AUC=0.596) was similar to that of the PTV measurement (AUC=0.621). Compared with 2D and 3D measurements, 1D measurement is superior for predicting prognosis in NPC (C-index of 0.672, 0.663, and 0.646 were for 1D, 2D, and 3D measurements, respectively; P < 0.005). Survival analysis showed that patients with non-responders had worse prognosis (P < 0.05). ConclusionsThe 1D measurement more closely agreed with the PTV measurement than the 2D and 3D measurements for predicting therapeutic responses in NPC. Therefore, we recommend using the less time-consuming 1D-RECIST criteria in routine clinical practice.