MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1136/ijgc-2024-005336

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2024

RECIST 1.1 versus clinico-radiological response assessment for locally advanced cervical cancer: implications on interpreting survival outcomes of future trials.

Charnalia Mayuri, Chopra Supriya, Mulani Jaahid, Popat Palak, Rath Sushmita, Thomeer Maarten, Mittal Prachi, Gupta Ankita, Boere Ingrid, Gupta Sudeep, Nout Remi A

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

To investigate differences in standard clinico-radiological evaluation versus Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 for reporting survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with chemoradiation and brachytherapy.

METHODS

Between November 2017 and March 2020, patients recruited in cervical cancer trials were identified. MRI at diagnosis and at least one follow-up imaging was mandatory. Disease-free survival and progression-free survival were determined using standard evaluation (clinical examination and symptom-directed imaging) and RECIST 1.1. Agreement between criteria was estimated using κ value. Sensitivity analysis was done to test the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of RECIST 1.1 in detecting response to treatment.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine eligible patients had at least one target lesion. Thirty-three patients (47.8%) had pathological lymph nodes. Of these 33 patients, RECIST 1.1 classified only 18% (6/33) as 'target nodal lesions' and the remaining nodes as 'non-target'. There were 6 (8.7%) and 8 (11.6%) patients with disease events using RECIST 1.1 and standard evaluation, respectively. The disease-free survival at 12, 18, and 24 months using RECIST 1.1 was 94.2%, 91.2%, 91.2%, and with standard evaluation was 94.2%, 89.7%, and 88.2%, respectively (p=0.58). Whereas, progression-free survival at 12, 18, and 24 months using RECIST 1.1 and standard evaluation were same (94.2%, 91.2%, and 91.2%, respectively). The κ value was 0.84, showing strong agreement in assessing disease-free survival, although an absolute difference of 3% between endpoint assessment methodologies. RECIST 1.1 had a sensitivity of 75% (95% CI 34.91% to 96.81%), specificity of 100% (95% CI 94.13% to 100%), and accuracy of 97.1% (95% CI 89.92% to 99.65%).

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed 1.5% and 3% difference in disease-free survival at 18 and 24 months and no difference in progression-free survival between RECIST 1.1 and standard evaluation in a patient cohort with low event rate.

Для цитирования: Charnalia Mayuri, Chopra Supriya, Mulani Jaahid, Popat Palak, Rath Sushmita, Thomeer Maarten, Mittal Prachi, Gupta Ankita, Boere Ingrid, Gupta Sudeep, Nout Remi A. RECIST 1.1 versus clinico-radiological response assessment for locally advanced cervical cancer: implications on interpreting survival outcomes of future trials.. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society. 2024. DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2024-005336.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.