Comparison study of efficacy evaluation based on RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST in hepato-cellular carcinoma treated with SBRT
10.3969/j.issn.1000-8179.2016.20.689
- VernacularTitle:RECIST 1.1标准和mRECIST标准在原发性肝癌SBRT治疗后疗效评价中的对比研究
- Author:
Yufei ZHANG
;
Jingbo KANG
;
Juyi WEN
;
Rui DU
;
Xinhong ZHANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
hepatocellular carcinoma;
stereotactic body radiotherapy;
radiographic response
- From:
Chinese Journal of Clinical Oncology
2016;43(20):902-906
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To compare the difference of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) and modified Re-sponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after stereotactic body radio-therapy (SBRT). Methods:From Janurary 2014 to August 2015, thirty-five patients with HCC treated with SBRT were included in De-partment of Radiation Oncology and Integrative Oncology of Navy General Hospital of PLA, and SBRT efficacy was evaluated based on RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST criteria. Results:Under RECIST 1.1, one patient had complete response (CR), 20 had partial response (PR), and 11 achieved stable disease (SD) at three months. Three patients had progressive disease (PD). The overall best response rate (CR+PR) was 60%. In comparison, under mRECIST, 10 patients had CR, 16 had PR, and 6 achieved SD at three months. Three patients had PD. The overall best response rate was 74.28%. The statistical analysis showed that Kappa=0.402 (χ2=43.3, P<0. 001) was less than 0.75 but greater than 0.4, indicating that it had not reached the two diagnostic criteria of consistency degree of satisfaction. According to the mRECIST criteria, the objective remission group (CR+PR) was superior to the nonobjective remission group (SD+PD) in progression-free survival (P<0.001). Conclusion:For unresectable HCC, mRECIST may be more useful than RECIST 1.1 in evaluating HCC response to SBRT.
