Comparison of performance of various tumor response criteria in assessment of sunitinib activity in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Clin Imaging

Department of Imaging, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Published: December 2016

Purpose: To compare the performance of various tumor response criteria (TRC) in the assessment of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) treated with sunitinib after failure of imatinib.

Methods: Sixty-two participants with advanced GIST in two clinical trials received oral sunitinib after prior failure of imatinib (median duration 24 weeks; interquartile range 14-56) and were followed with contrast-enhanced computed tomography at baseline and thereafter at median intervals of 6 weeks (IRQ 6-9). Tumor response was prospectively determined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0, and retrospectively reassessed for comparison using RECIST 1.1, Choi criteria, and modified Choi (mChoi) criteria using the original target lesions. For mChoi criteria, progressive disease was defined as 20% increase in sum of the longest dimension, similar to RECIST 1.1. Clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response, partial response, or stable disease ≥12 weeks) and progression-free survival were compared between various TRCs using kappa statistics.

Results: While partial response as the best response was more frequent by Choi and mChoi criteria (50% each) than RECIST 1.1 (15%) and RECIST 1.0 (13%), CBR was similar between various TRCs (overall CBR 60%-77%, 77%-94% agreement between all TRC pairs). Time to best response was shorter for Choi and mChoi criteria (median 11 weeks each) compared to RECIST 1.1 and RECIST 1.0 (median 25 and 24 weeks, respectively). PFS was similar for RECIST 1.1, RECIST 1.0, and mChoi (median 35 weeks each), and shortest for Choi criteria (median 23 weeks).

Conclusions: CBR was similar among the various TRCs, although Choi criteria led to earlier determination of disease progression. Therefore, RECIST 1.1 and mChoi criteria may be preferred for response assessment in patients with advanced GIST.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.04.007DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

mchoi criteria
20
tumor response
12
choi criteria
12
choi mchoi
12
median weeks
12
criteria
11
response
10
recist
10
performance tumor
8
response criteria
8

Similar Publications

The purpose of this study was to determine if dual-energy CT (DECT) vital iodine tumor burden (ViTB), a direct assessment of tumor vascularity, allows reliable response assessment in patients with GIST compared to established CT criteria such as RECIST1.1 and modified Choi (mChoi). From 03/2014 to 12/2019, 138 patients (64 years [32-94 years]) with biopsy proven GIST were entered in this prospective, multi-center trial.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

CT-based criteria for assessing the gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy are limited in part because tumor attenuation is influenced by treatment-related changes including hemorrhage and calcification. The iodine concentration may be less impacted by such changes. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the dual-energy CT (DECT) vital iodine tumor burden (TB) allows improved differentiation between treatment responders and nonresponders among patients with metastatic GIST who are undergoing TKI therapy compared with established CT and PET/CT criteria.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: No comparative study on evaluating performance of radiological criteria has been investigated in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with the combination of Regorafenib and anti-programmed cell death 1(PD-1) antibody. We aimed to compare the performance of different radiological criteria in evaluating response in mCRC patients treated with the combination of Regorafenib plus anti-PD-1 antibody.

Method: We retrospectively recruited patients treated with Regorafenib and anti-PD-1 antibody in a single institution.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: To identify the optimum response criteria for first-line targeted pazopanib therapy in patients with mRCC using solid tumor response criteria and clinical risk factors.

Methods: Pre- and post-treatment CTs of patients (n = 43) with mRCC treated with first-line pazopanib therapy were analyzed retrospectively. Treatment response was evaluated with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!