Purpose: Published studies have not investigated the suitability of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) criteria, and modified RECIST (mRECIST) for assessing the response of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma to treatment with sorafenib combined with transarterial chemoembolization. Here, we aimed to define the earliest time at which the response to combination therapy could be accurately assessed and validate the prognostic value of these criteria at this early posttherapy time point.Experimental Design: A total of 114 consecutive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving combination therapy were retrospectively enrolled. The therapy response at different time points was assessed using RECIST, EASL, and mRECIST. Cox regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess overall survival (OS) in the responders and nonresponders.Results: At the third follow-up (median, 94 days; range, 89-102 days) after therapy, the response rates obtained using EASL (50.6%) and mRECIST (51.6%) were greater than that obtained using RECIST (16.5%). The agreement was strong between the mRECIST and EASL results (k ¼ 0.9) but weak between mRECIST and RECIST (k ¼ 0.3). The EASL and mRECIST responses significantly correlated with survival. Risk reductions of 52% and 50% were observed for EASL and mRECIST responders, respectively, compared with nonresponders. However, no significant association between the treatment response and survival was observed using RECIST.Conclusions: The earliest time to evaluate the response to combination therapy is 3 months (median, 94 days) after therapy. EASL and mRECIST responses are independent predictors for OS at this early time point.

No abstract

BackgroundAmong the growing number of patients with hematologic neoplasms hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU), the largest proportion of these patients are diagnosed with lymphoma. However, less attention has been paid in the past to identifying critically ill patients and assessing the prognosis of patients in ICU. Traditional critical care-related scores have shown limitations and inaccuracy in predicting mortality risk.MethodsPatients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) were searched for in the Marketplace for Information in Intensive Care Medicine III (MIMIC-III) database. We searched mortality within 28 days as the primary endpoint. Logistics regression was used to screen risk factors. A calibration curve was used for internal validation, and the ROC curve and AUC were used to compare the new model with traditional scores.Results405 patients with DLBCL are enrolled in the project. Multivariate analysis shows the patients with the level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 327 U/L had an increased risk of 28-day mortality in ICU than others (OR = 13.04, p<0.01). Notably, length of ICU stay, LDH, creatinine, white blood cell counts, and APS III score are independent prognostic factors for patients with DLBCL in the ICU. Then, all these independent prognostic factors are selected into our prediction model. The new model has good accuracy (C-index=0.863) and a calibration curve, which improves clinical status concerning established ratings such as IPI, NCCN-IPI score, SOFA, APS III, and LODS. The results of a multicenter external validation including 124 DLBCL patients also showed that the new model was more accurate than all other models.ConclusionsThe elevated level of LDH indicates a poor prognosis of patients with DLBCL in the ICU. Our risk score with crossed validation based on the level of LDH shows a significant prognostic value and may be a valuable tool for assessing the critically ill as well.

No abstract