Kathleen Ruchalski, Jordan M Anaokar, Matthias R Benz, Rohit Dewan, Michael L Douek, Jonathan G Goldin
{"title":"呼吁客观性:放射医师提出的实体瘤反应评估愿望清单(RECIST 1.1)。","authors":"Kathleen Ruchalski, Jordan M Anaokar, Matthias R Benz, Rohit Dewan, Michael L Douek, Jonathan G Goldin","doi":"10.1186/s40644-024-00802-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 provides key guidance for performing imaging response assessment and defines image-based outcome metrics in oncology clinical trials, including progression free survival. In this framework, tumors identified on imaging are designated as either target lesions, non-target disease or new lesions and a structured categorical response is assigned at each imaging time point. While RECIST provides definitions for these categories, it specifically and objectively defines only the target disease. Predefined thresholds of size change provide unbiased metrics for determining objective response and disease progression of the target lesions. However, worsening of non-target disease or emergence of new lesions is given the same importance in determining disease progression despite these being qualitatively assessed and less rigorously defined. The subjective assessment of non-target and new disease contributes to reader variability, which can impact the quality of image interpretation and even the determination of progression free survival. The RECIST Working Group has made significant efforts in developing RECIST 1.1 beyond its initial publication, particularly in its application to targeted agents and immunotherapy. A review of the literature highlights that the Working Group has occasionally employed or adopted objective measures for assessing non-target and new lesions in their evaluation of RECIST-based outcome measures. Perhaps a prospective evaluation of these more objective definitions for non-target and new lesions within the framework of RECIST 1.1 might improve reader interpretation. Ideally, these changes could also better align with clinically meaningful outcome measures of patient survival or quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":9548,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Imaging","volume":"24 1","pages":"154"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11566494/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A call for objectivity: Radiologists' proposed wishlist for response evaluation in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1).\",\"authors\":\"Kathleen Ruchalski, Jordan M Anaokar, Matthias R Benz, Rohit Dewan, Michael L Douek, Jonathan G Goldin\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40644-024-00802-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 provides key guidance for performing imaging response assessment and defines image-based outcome metrics in oncology clinical trials, including progression free survival. In this framework, tumors identified on imaging are designated as either target lesions, non-target disease or new lesions and a structured categorical response is assigned at each imaging time point. While RECIST provides definitions for these categories, it specifically and objectively defines only the target disease. Predefined thresholds of size change provide unbiased metrics for determining objective response and disease progression of the target lesions. However, worsening of non-target disease or emergence of new lesions is given the same importance in determining disease progression despite these being qualitatively assessed and less rigorously defined. The subjective assessment of non-target and new disease contributes to reader variability, which can impact the quality of image interpretation and even the determination of progression free survival. The RECIST Working Group has made significant efforts in developing RECIST 1.1 beyond its initial publication, particularly in its application to targeted agents and immunotherapy. A review of the literature highlights that the Working Group has occasionally employed or adopted objective measures for assessing non-target and new lesions in their evaluation of RECIST-based outcome measures. Perhaps a prospective evaluation of these more objective definitions for non-target and new lesions within the framework of RECIST 1.1 might improve reader interpretation. Ideally, these changes could also better align with clinically meaningful outcome measures of patient survival or quality of life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Imaging\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"154\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11566494/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-024-00802-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-024-00802-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A call for objectivity: Radiologists' proposed wishlist for response evaluation in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1).
The Response Evaluation in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 provides key guidance for performing imaging response assessment and defines image-based outcome metrics in oncology clinical trials, including progression free survival. In this framework, tumors identified on imaging are designated as either target lesions, non-target disease or new lesions and a structured categorical response is assigned at each imaging time point. While RECIST provides definitions for these categories, it specifically and objectively defines only the target disease. Predefined thresholds of size change provide unbiased metrics for determining objective response and disease progression of the target lesions. However, worsening of non-target disease or emergence of new lesions is given the same importance in determining disease progression despite these being qualitatively assessed and less rigorously defined. The subjective assessment of non-target and new disease contributes to reader variability, which can impact the quality of image interpretation and even the determination of progression free survival. The RECIST Working Group has made significant efforts in developing RECIST 1.1 beyond its initial publication, particularly in its application to targeted agents and immunotherapy. A review of the literature highlights that the Working Group has occasionally employed or adopted objective measures for assessing non-target and new lesions in their evaluation of RECIST-based outcome measures. Perhaps a prospective evaluation of these more objective definitions for non-target and new lesions within the framework of RECIST 1.1 might improve reader interpretation. Ideally, these changes could also better align with clinically meaningful outcome measures of patient survival or quality of life.
Cancer ImagingONCOLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍:
Cancer Imaging is an open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing original articles, reviews and editorials written by expert international radiologists working in oncology.
The journal encompasses CT, MR, PET, ultrasound, radionuclide and multimodal imaging in all kinds of malignant tumours, plus new developments, techniques and innovations. Topics of interest include:
Breast Imaging
Chest
Complications of treatment
Ear, Nose & Throat
Gastrointestinal
Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic
Imaging biomarkers
Interventional
Lymphoma
Measurement of tumour response
Molecular functional imaging
Musculoskeletal
Neuro oncology
Nuclear Medicine
Paediatric.