Alternative response criteria (Choi, European association for the study of the liver, and modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors [RECIST]) versus RECIST 1.1 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib

Oncologist

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 394-402

  Ronot, Maxime ^a   Bouattour, Mohamed ^a   Wassermann, Johanna ^a   Bruno, Onorina ^a   Dreyer, Chantal ^a   Larroque, Béatrice ^a   Castera, Laurent ^a   Vilgrain, Valérie ^a   Belghiti, Jacques ^a   Raymond, Eric ^a   Faivre, Sandrine ^a  

^a BEAUJON HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

Antiangiogenic agents; Computed tomography; Density; Targeted therapy; Tumor evaluation

Indexed keywords

SORAFENIB; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CARBANILAMIDE DERIVATIVE; NICOTINAMIDE; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITOR;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASTHENIA; CANCER STAGING; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIARRHEA; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; LIVER; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; SURVIVAL RATE;

ADULT; AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIVER; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NIACINAMIDE; PHENYLUREA COMPOUNDS; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITORS; RESPONSE EVALUATION CRITERIA IN SOLID TUMORS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL RATE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84898483468     PISSN: 10837159     EISSN: 1549490X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0114     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:205-216.
2. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247.
3. World Health Organization. WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva, Switzerland:World Health Organization; 1979.
4. Abou-Alfa GK, Schwartz L, Ricci S et al. Phase II study of sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2006;24: 4293-4300.
5. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl JMed 2008;359:378-390.
6. Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia- Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2009;10: 25-34.
7. Faivre S, Raymond E, Boucher E et al. Safety and efficacy of sunitinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: An open-label, multicentre, phase II study. Lancet Oncol 2009;10: 794-800.
8. Zhu AX, Sahani DV, Duda DG et al. Efficacy, safety, and potential biomarkers of sunitinib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase II study. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:3027-3035.
9. Koeberle D, Montemurro M, Samaras P et al. Continuous sunitinib treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and Swiss Association for the Study of the Liver (SASL) multicenter phase II trial (SAKK 77/06). The Oncologist 2010;15:285-292.
10. Cheng A, Kang Y, Lin D et al. Phase III trial of sunitinib (Su) versus sorafenib (So) in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). J Clin Oncol 2011; 29(suppl):4000a.
11. Faivre SJ, Bouattour M, Dreyer C et al. Sunitinib in hepatocellular carcinoma: Redefining appropriate dosing, schedule,and activityend points [letter]. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:e248-e250; author reply e251-e252.
12. Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. J Hepatol 2001;35:421-430.
13. Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2010;30:052-060.
14. Edeline J, Boucher E, Rolland Y et al. Comparison of tumor response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and modified RECIST in patients treated with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer 2012;118: 147-156.
15. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: Proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1753-1759.
16. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, de Castro Faria S et al. CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: A quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;183:1619-1628.
17. Faivre S, Zappa M, Vilgrain V et al. Changes in tumor density in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sunitinib. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17:4504-4512.
18. European Association for the Study of the Liver; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012;56:908-943.
19. Kaneko S, Furuse J, Kudo M et al. Guideline on the use ofnewanticancer drugs for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma 2010 update. Hepatol Res 2012;42:523-542.
20. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observeragreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-174.
21. Svanholm H, Starklint H, Gundersen HJ et al. Reproducibility of histomorphologic diagnoses with special reference to the kappa statistic. APMIS 1989;97:689-698.
22. Forner A, Reig ME, de Lope CR et al. Current strategy for staging and treatment: The BCLC update and future prospects. Semin Liver Dis 2010;30: 61-74.
23. Gillmore R, Stuart S, Kirkwood A et al. EASL and mRECIST responses are independent prognostic factors for survival in hepatocellular cancer patients treated with transarterial embolization. J Hepatol 2011;55:1309-1316.
24. Memon K, Kulik L, Lewandowski RJ et al. Radiographic response to locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts patient survival times. Gastroenterology 2011;141:526-535.
25. Shim JH, Lee HC, Kim SO et al. Which response criteria best help predict survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma following chemoembolization? A validation study of old and new models. Radiology 2012;262:708-718.