Response assessment in solid tumours: a comparison of WHO, SWOG and RECIST guidelines

Julka, P.K.; Doval, DC; Gupta, Subhash K.; Rath, G.K.

doi:10.1259/bjr/32785946

Cited by 42 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The patients were classified as with no response to chemotherapy when there was disease progression or stable disease (15) . Response to treatment was considered when it was complete or partial, and was maintained for at least four weeks.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of glutathione S-transferaseM1 (GSTM1) and its polymorphisms GSTM1 null in the response to treatment with chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Takeda

Leite

Junqueira

et al. 2011

Einstein (São Paulo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess if the genotype of the glutathione S-transferase M1 (GSTM1) enzyme and its GSTM1 null polymorphism can influence the response to chemotherapeutic treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Methods: Case-control study of 112 patients with advanced ovarian cancer submitted to chemotherapy during the period from January 1995 to December 2005. The tissue to study the GSTM1 genotype and its deletion came from surgical staging to treat ovarian cancer. The PCR product generates two distinct genotypes, characterized as positive and null. The response to chemotherapy was evaluated using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Patients were classified as having: a) no response, b) a response. Results: The presence of GSTM1 or its GSTM1 null polymorphism did not influence the preoperative chemotherapy response. Among the patients who did respond, 88.9% presented with positive GSTM1 and 11.1% with null GSTM1. Among the patients that did not respond, 85.71% presented with positive GSTM1 and 14.29% with null GSTM1 (p = 0.825). GSTM1 and its GSTM1 null polymorphism had no influence on the postoperative response to chemotherapy. Among the patients who did respond, 80.65% presented with positive GSTM1 and 19.35% with null GSTM1. Among the patients who did not respond, 87.50% presented with positive GSTM1 and 12.5% with the null polymorphism (p = 0.553). Conclusion: No difference was observed in the response to treatment with chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, as to the GSTM1 genotype compared to its GSTM1 null polymorphism.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of glutathione S-transferaseM1 (GSTM1) and its polymorphisms GSTM1 null in the response to treatment with chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Takeda

Leite

Junqueira

et al. 2011

Einstein (São Paulo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The response was categorized as progressive disease or freedom from progression. Freedom from progression was defined as an absence of objective progression; it included patients with either a complete response, a partial response, or stable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (recist) 20 .…”

Section: Response To Chemotherapymentioning

confidence: 99%

Has the Practice of Radiation Oncology for Locally Advanced and Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Changed in Canada?

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAccurate prediction of outcome in advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (nsclc) remains challenging. Even within the same stage and treatment group, survival and response to treatment vary. We set out to determine the predictive value of inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (crp) and white blood cells (wbcs) in patients with advanced nsclc. Patients and MethodsPatients were assigned a prognostic index (pi):• 0 for crp 10 mg/L or less and wbcs 11×10 9 /L or less,• 1 if one of the two markers was elevated, and • 2 if both markers were elevated.We then used chest computed tomography (ct) imaging to evaluate response after 2 cycles of chemotherapy treatment. ResultsOf 134 patients, 46 had a pi of 0; 60, a pi of 1; and 28, a pi of 2. Disease progressed in 41 patients. Progression was significantly more frequent among patients with a pi of 2 (p = 0.008). Median survival was 20.0 months for the pi 0 group, 10.4 months for the pi 1 group, and 7.9 months for the pi 2 group (p < 0.001). The pi was the only significant prognostic factor for survival even after adjustment for performance status, smoking, and weight loss (hazard ratio: 1.57; 95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 2.14; p = 0.004). ConclusionsInflammatory state correlates significantly with both chemotherapy response and survival in stage iv nsclc. The pi may provide additional guidance for therapeutic decision-making.

show abstract

“…1b). It is also important during the follow-up for morphological and spatial monitoring particularly in terms of the response of hepatic metastases to various types of treatment [8].…”

Section: Tumori Neuroendocrini Funzionantimentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging of neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumours

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of imaging in functioning endocrine tumours (FETs) is primarily to detect the tumour, that is, to verify lesion number and location. Radiological detection of carcinoid tumours is limited by typical tumour location throughout the gastrointestinal tract or appendix and is therefore dependent on the tumour being large enough to make it recognisable in that site. The most common FET is insulinoma, which is commonly characterised by the typical appearance of a hypervascular lesion at multidetector-row computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. A particularly important role is played by intraoperative ultrasound in defining the exact number of lesions, their relationship with adjacent vascular structures and the pancreatic duct for the purposes of correct surgical planning (enucleation or resection). In the setting of nonfunctioning endocrine tumours (NFETs), which manifest late as large masses causing compression symptoms or as incidental findings, imaging is not primarily aimed at tumour detection, as this is relatively easy given the large size of the lesions. Rather, its role is to characterise the tumour and, in particular, to differentiate pancreatic NFET from ductal adenocarcinoma, as in comparison, malignant NFETs have a more favourable prognosis (5-year survival rate 40% compared with 3%-5% for adenocarcinoma) and therefore require different treatment approaches. As NFET are often malignant, they also require accurate staging and appropriate follow-up. In 80% of cases, NFETs have a "typical" imaging appearance: location in the pancreatic head, large dimensions (diameter between 5 and 15 cm, >10 cm in 30% of cases), capsule, sharp and regular margins owing to the expansile and noninfiltrative growth pattern, solid density and arterial hypervascularity. Some 20% of NFETs display different imaging characteristics ("atypical" appearance) as a result of arterial hypovascularity due to the presence of abundant fibrous stroma. Lastly, a small percentage of NFETs has yet a different appearance ("unusual") due to the cystic nature and/or diffuse location throughout the pancreatic parenchyma.

show abstract

Response assessment in solid tumours: a comparison of WHO, SWOG and RECIST guidelines

Cited by 42 publications

References 9 publications

Assessment of glutathione S-transferaseM1 (GSTM1) and its polymorphisms GSTM1 null in the response to treatment with chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Assessment of glutathione S-transferaseM1 (GSTM1) and its polymorphisms GSTM1 null in the response to treatment with chemotherapy in advanced ovarian carcinoma

Has the Practice of Radiation Oncology for Locally Advanced and Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Changed in Canada?

Imaging of neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumours

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About