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)。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实体瘤反应评估(RECIST)1.1 为进行影像反应评估提供了重要指导,并定义了肿瘤临床试验中基于影像的结果指标,包括无进展生存期。在这一框架中,成像确定的肿瘤被指定为靶病灶、非靶病灶或新病灶,并在每个成像时间点分配一个结构化的分类反应。虽然 RECIST 提供了这些类别的定义,但它只对靶疾病进行了具体而客观的定义。预定义的大小变化阈值为确定靶病变的客观反应和疾病进展提供了无偏见的衡量标准。然而,非目标疾病的恶化或新病灶的出现在确定疾病进展方面具有同样的重要性,尽管这些病灶是定性评估的,定义也不那么严格。对非目标疾病和新病变的主观评估会造成读者的差异性,从而影响图像解读的质量,甚至影响无进展生存期的确定。RECIST 工作组在开发 RECIST 1.1 方面做出了巨大努力,超越了其最初发布的版本,尤其是在将其应用于靶向药物和免疫疗法方面。文献综述显示,工作组在评估基于 RECIST 的结果指标时,偶尔会采用或采纳一些客观指标来评估非靶点病变和新病变。也许在 RECIST 1.1 框架内对这些更客观的非目标病灶和新病灶定义进行前瞻性评估,可能会改善读者的解读。理想情况下,这些变化还能更好地与患者生存期或生活质量等具有临床意义的结果指标保持一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Imaging
Cancer Imaging ONCOLOGY-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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信