Tumor Response Evaluation Criteria Research Articles

Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer transformed into small-cell lung cancer after treatment

Objective: To analyze the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with sensitive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations who developed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) transformation after treatment with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Methods: We conducted a retrospective collection of clinical data for 21 patients with advanced EGFR mutant NSCLC who developed SCLC transformation after EGFR-TKI treatment at Beijing Chest Hospital, Capital Medical University from January 2015 to December 2021. The clinical characteristics were summarized and the prognosis analysis was conducted. Patients were followed up until February 2024. The efficacy was evaluated using Solid Tumor Response Evaluation Criteria, and survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare the differences in survival time (OS) between limited stage and extensive stage in transformed SCLC patients. Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the influencing factors of survival after SCLC transformation. Results: Among the 21 patients, there were 5 males and 16 females, with an age range of 33-74 years old [(58.9±2.6) years old]. All 21 patients were adenocarcinoma with sensitive EGFR mutations. There were 18 cases (85.7%) with EGFR gene 19del mutation, including 1 case of 19del+anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) mutation, and 3 cases of L858R mutation. Among the transformed SCLC, there were 11 cases of pure SCLC and 10 cases of mixed SCLC (coexisting of adenocarcinoma and small cell carcinoma components). The median time from diagnosis of NSCLC to SCLC transformation was 12.0 months (95%CI: 7.6-16.3 months). Among the 21 cases of SCLC transformation, there were 13 cases with the extensive stage and 8 cases with the limited stage. Among them, 16 patients received systemic chemotherapy based on etoposide, of which 13 cases could be evaluated for efficacy, 11 cases could be calculated for PFS. Five cases had partial remission, 5 cases were stable, 3 cases had disease progression, and 3 cases cloud not be evaluated. The median progression free survival time (PFS) was 4.8 months (95%CI: 2.8-6.8 months). The median survival time (OS) after SCLC transformation in 21 patients was 10.6 months (95%CI: 7.0-14.2 months), with a median OS of 8.8 months (95%CI: 6.3-11.4 months) for patients with the extensive stage and 27.5 months (95%CI: 9.6-34.4 months) for patients with the limited stage, with statistically significant differences (P=0.002). Cox proportional hazards model analysis showed that the limited stage after SCLC transformation was a protective factor for OS (HR=0.32, 95%CI: 0.12-0.73, P=0.010). The median OS of 21 patients from the diagnosis of lung cancer was 24.9 months (95%CI: 13.0-36.7 months). Conclusions: NSCLC patients with SCLC transformation are all adenocarcinomas, and the proportion of EGFR19del mutations is relatively high. After SCLC transformation, the standard chemotherapy regimen for SCLC is generally used for treatment. The OS after SCLC transformation is related to the stage, and the prognosis is better in the limited stage.

ESR Essentials: response assessment criteria in oncologic imaging-practice recommendations by the European Society of Oncologic Imaging.

Assessing the response to oncological treatments is paramount for determining the prognosis and defining the best treatment for each patient. Several biomarkers, including imaging, can be used, but standardization is fundamental for consistency and reliability. Tumor response evaluation criteria have been defined by international groups for application in pharmaceutical clinical trials evaluating new drugs or therapeutic strategies. RECIST 1.1 criteria are exclusively based on unidimensional lesion measurements; changes in tumor size are used as surrogate imaging biomarkers to correlate with patient outcomes. However, increased tumor size does not always reflect tumor progression. The introduction of immunotherapy has led to the development of new criteria (iRECIST, Level of Evidence (LoE) Ib) that consider the possibility that an increase in disease burden is secondary to the immune response instead of progression, with the new concept of Unconfirmed Progressive Disease (a first progression event which must be confirmed on follow-up). Specific criteria were devised for HCC (mRECIST, LoE IV), which measure only enhancing HCC portions to account for changes after local therapy. For GIST treated with imatinib, criteria were developed to account for the possible increase in size reflecting a response rather than a progression by assessing both tumor size and density on CT (Choi, LoE II). This article provides concise and relevant practice recommendations aimed at general radiologists to help choose and apply the most appropriate criteria for assessing response to treatment in different oncologic scenarios. Though these criteria were developed for clinical trials, they may be applied in clinical practice as a guide for day-to-day interpretation. KEY POINTS: Response evaluation criteria, designed for use in clinical trials, might serve as a surrogate biomarker for overall survival. RECIST 1.1 defines measurable and non-measurable disease among which target lesions and non-target lesions are selected at baseline as reference for follow-ups. Some therapies and/or cancers require the use of different criteria, such as iRECIST, mRECIST, and Choi criteria.

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of dual immunotherapy in patients with driver gene and programmed death ligand-1 double negative advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Objective: To discuss the efficacy and safety of the dual immunotherapy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are double negative for driver gene and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Methods: We conducted a retrospective collection of clinical data for 61 patients with advanced NSCLC who were negative for both driver genes and PD-L1 and received dual immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2019 to June 2023. Based on treatment conditions, patients were divided into first-line and non-first-line dual immunotherapy groups. Patients were followed up monthly, with the follow-up period ending on October 1, 2023. The efficacy was evaluated using Solid Tumor Response Evaluation Criteria, and adverse reactions were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events developed by the National Cancer Institute in the United States. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare the differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between first-line and non-first-line dual immunotherapy patients. The influence factors of PFS were analyzed using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: Among the 61 NSCLC patients, 49 were male (80.3%), with an age range of 23-88 years [(65.3±7.4) years]. There were 14 cases (23.0%) classified as stage ⅢC and 47 cases (77.0%) classified as stage Ⅳ according to TNM staging. Forty cases (65.6%) received non-first-line treatment. The objective response rate (ORR) was 24.6% (15/61), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 52.5% (32/61). All 61 patients were followed up, with a median follow-up time of 17.8 months. The median PFS was 6.0 months (95%CI: 5.5-6.4 months), and the median OS was 17.0 months (95%CI: 14.8-19.2 months). For patients receiving first-line dual immunotherapy, the median PFS was longer than for those receiving non-first-line dual immunotherapy [7.0 months (95%CI: 6.0-7.9 months) vs 4.0 months (95%CI: 3.3-4.6 months), P<0.001]; similarly, the median OS for patients receiving first-line dual immunotherapy was longer than for those receiving non-first-line dual immunotherapy [19.0 months (95%CI: 18.1-19.9 months) vs 13.0 months (95%CI: 10.8-15.1 months), P<0.001]. Multivariate Cox risk regression model analysis showed that distant tumor metastasis (HR=1.414, 95%CI: 1.253-1.725), non-first-line dual immunotherapy (HR=1.412, 95%CI: 1.184-1.652), and tumor mutation burden<10 mut/Mb (HR=1.328, 95%CI: 1.151-1.546) were risk factors for PFS, while non-squamous carcinoma (HR=0.917, 95%CI: 0.823-0.984) was a protective factor for PFS. Immune-related adverse reactions occurred in 41 cases (67.2%), including 21 cases (32.8%) of grade 3-4 adverse reactions. Eight cases (13.1%) discontinued treatment, and there were no deaths. Conclusions: Dual immunotherapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab can be a treatment option for driver gene and PD-L1 double-negative advanced NSCLC. Distant tumor metastasis, non-first-line dual immunotherapy, and tumor mutation burden<10 mut/Mb are risk factors affecting patients' PFS, while non-squamous cell carcinoma is a protective factor affecting patients' PFS.

Analysis of the efficacy and influencing factors of preoperative P-SOX neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen for progressive gastric cancer-construction of a clinical prediction model.

Preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy is one of the most common treatments for patients with advanced gastric cancer that cannot be completely removed by surgery. Nab-paclitaxel is a nano-formulation of paclitaxel that has been shown to be effective in treating stomach cancer. In addition, oxaliplatin + S-1 (SOX) has been a first-line chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer, and it has the effect of tumor downstaging, improving the R0 resection rate, and reducing the postoperative recurrence rate, but the side effects are significant. During the application of oxaliplatin, obvious gastrointestinal reactions such as nausea and vomiting can be observed. There may also be blood system side effects such as leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, as well as serious adverse reactions such as peripheral neuropathy. Therefore, we reduced the amount of oxaliplatin in SOX and added nab-paclitaxel on the basis of this, in order to increase the efficacy while reducing the side effects of SOX regimen. We selected 192 patients with advanced gastric cancer admitted to the Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology of Qinghai University Hospital from July 2019 to February 2022, and all were treated with nab-paclitaxel plus oxaliplatin + S-1 neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen, and underwent further surgery after chemotherapy. The tumor regression grade (TRG grade) and response evaluation criteria of solid tumor 1.1 (RECIST1.1) were taken as the dependent variables. According to TRG classification, 120 patients were effective (grade 0, 1, 2 = 62.50%, age: 55.63 ± 9.02 years), 72 patients were ineffective (grade 3 = 37.50%, 55.82 ± 9.21 years), and the effective rate of chemotherapy was 62.50%. According to RECIST1.1, 116 patients were effective (CR + PR = 60.42%, mean age 55.84 ± 9.02 years), 76 patients were ineffective (SD + PD = 39.58%, 55.47 ± 9.19 years), and the effective rate was 60.42%. The factors p < 0.2 in univariate logistic regression analysis were included in multivariate logistic regression analysis, and p < 0.05 was the statistical difference, and statistically significant factors were screened out for modeling and plotted the nomogram. Among them, in the tumor regression grade, the final factors related to effective chemotherapy are the degree of differentiation, cT. stage, tumor diameter, chemotherapy cycle, and the final factors related to effective chemotherapy in the solid tumor response evaluation criteria are the degree of differentiation, cT. stage, tumor diameter. Therefore, we conclude that the regimen of nab-paclitaxel combined with oxaliplatin and S-1 has certain positive significance in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

Yttrium-90 radiation segmentectomy for hepatic metastases: A multi-institutional study of safety and efficacy.

This study assessed the outcomes of Yttrium-90 (90 Y) radiation segmentectomy for hepatic metastases unamenable to resection or ablation. Over 6 years, 36 patients with 53 tumors underwent segmental radioembolization. Patients were not candidates for surgical resection or thermal ablation. Malignancies included metastases from colorectal cancer (31%), neuroendocrine tumors (28%), sarcoma (19%), and others (22%). Eighty-one percentof patients had undergone prior treatment with systemic chemotherapy. Ongoing systemic chemotherapy was continued. Toxicity, tumor response, tumor progression, and survival were assessed. The median tumor size was 3.6 cm (range 1.2-6.1 cm). Adverse event rates were low, with no hepatic-related Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsGrade 3 or 4 toxicity. Target tumor Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors disease control rate was 92% (28% partial response, 64% stable disease). For patients with enhancing tumors (n = 14), modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors target tumor objective response rate was 100%. During a median follow-up of 12 months, target tumor progression occurred in 28% of treated tumors. Overall survival was 96% and 83% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. 90 Y radiation segmentectomy for hepatic metastases demonstrates high rates of tumor control and minimal toxicity. Radiation segmentectomy should be considered for patients with metastatic hepatic malignancy who are not candidates for surgical resection.

Use of Initial Modified RECIST Tumor Response Evaluation Criteria for Predicting Survival in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Transarterial Chemoembolization with Drug-Eluting Beads

Introduction: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) reduces tumor growth and increases survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Drug-eluting beads (DEB) deliver slow-release chemotherapy and reduce systemic toxicity during TACE. This study correlated initial tumor response according to modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria and 1-year survival in patients with HCC treated with TACE-DEB, and identified predictors of tumor response. Methods: Fifty-two patients with HCC received TACE-DEB loaded with doxorubicin 75 mg during a 6-month period. Tumor response was evaluated 1 month after the procedure according to mRECIST criteria. Results: Most patients were cirrhotic and etiology of liver disease was hepatitis C in 26/52 (50%). Similar numbers of patients had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) A and BCLC B disease. Most patients had one nodule (66%). Complete response (CR) was achieved in 12/52 (23%), partial response in 19/52 (37%), stable disease in 4/52 (8%) and progressive disease in 17/52 (32%). Largest HCC ≤58 mm and BCLC stage A were associated with CR. The 1-year survival was 74%, with survival rates of 95% and 56% in the BCLC A and B groups, respectively. Variables reflecting tumor extension were associated with better survival. CR according to mRECIST criteria was a predictor of better 1-year survival (100% vs. 64%, P studies are needed to evaluate other predictors of survival and to determine if tumor response predicts long-term survival.

Which is the Optimal Response Criteria for Evaluating Preoperative Treatment in Esophageal Cancer: RECIST or Histology?

Preoperative treatment is a promising strategy for improving long-term outcomes in advanced esophageal cancer. Two tumor response evaluation criteria for preoperative treatment are available: response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) and histological criteria. This prospective study aimed to identify which was a better surrogate end point for survival in the preoperative setting. We analyzed all eligible patients (n=164) from the preoperative treatment group in a phase III trial comparing preoperative versus postoperative 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin for clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer. Intercriteria reliability was evaluated with the proportion of agreement and the kappa coefficient. For validity analyses, hazard ratios (HR) of response to nonresponse and differences in response rates between short- and long-term survivors were evaluated. The clinical and histological response rates were 37.8% (62 of 164) and 20.1% (33 of 164), respectively. The proportion of agreement for response to nonresponse between the 2 criteria was 70.3%, and the kappa coefficient was 0.34. The HR for death in patients with histological response (0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.55, P<0.001) was lower than for those with RECIST response (0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.91, P=0.018). The difference in response rates between short- and long-term survivors according to histological criteria (27 vs. 7%, P<0.001) was larger than with RECIST (42 vs. 30%, P=0.13). Intercriteria agreement was relatively low, and histological criteria yielded more valid assessments of response than RECIST. Histological response rate seemed to be the better surrogate end point of survival in the preoperative setting.

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, 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.

Establishing Chinese medicine characteristic tumor response evaluation system is the key to promote internationalization of Chinese medicine oncology

The features and advantages of Chinese medicine (CM) in cancer comprehensive treatment have been in the spotlight of experts both at home and abroad. However, how to evaluate the effect of CM more objectively, scientifically and systematically is still the key problem of clinical trial, and also a limitation to the development and internationalization of CM oncology. The change of tumor response evaluation system in conventional medicine is gradually consistent with the features of CM clinical effect, such as they both focus on a combination of soft endpoints (i.e. quality of life, clinical benefit, etc.) and hard endpoints (i.e. tumor remission rate, time to progress, etc.). Although experts have proposed protocols of CM tumor response evaluation criteria and come to an agreement in general, divergences still exist in the importance, quantification and CM feature of the potential endpoints. Thus, establishing a CM characteristic and wildly accepted tumor response evaluation system is the key to promote internationalization of CM oncology, and also provides a more convenient and scientific platform for CM international cooperation and communication.

Abstract No. 27: Do the RECIST Amendment for Tumor Response Evaluation criteria correlate better with patient outcomes than the RECIST 1.1 criteria after conventional transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)?

Deposition of Lipiodol and absence of arterial enhancement after conventional TACE have been shown to correlate with coagulation necrosis in treated tumors, but these changes may not result in reduced tumor size. RECIST criteria are based solely on change in tumor size while the RECIST Amendment for Tumor Response Evaluation (2D EASL) criteria assess tumor necrosis. The purpose of this study was to compare RECIST criteria (version 1.1) and 2D EASL criteria in evaluating tumor response and patient survival after conventional TACE for HCC.

Revaluation of tumor response evaluation criteria in solid tumors

Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) and WHO Criteria are the most in portant ones.There are some differences between them,in one word,RECIST is better than WHO Criteria when implemented in clinic.However,there are some shortcomings in RECIST.Improvement is needed to make the criteria more and more Derfect and scientific. Key words: Neoplasms; Evaluation studies; Treatment outcome