Division of Diagnostic Imaging and Intervention, Department of Liver Transplantation, Hepatology, and Infectious Diseases, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Semin Liver Dis. 2010 Feb;30(1):52-60. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1247132. Epub 2010 Feb 19.
The endpoint in cancer research is overall survival. Nonetheless, other potential surrogate endpoints, such as response rate and time to progression, are currently used. Measurement of response rate in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has become a controversial issue. The World Health Organization (WHO) criteria underestimate the actual response rate; thus, they were amended in 2000 by a panel of experts convened by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) to take into account treatment-induced tumor necrosis. Applying these guidelines, there was an association between response rate and outcome prediction. More recently, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline was proposed as a method for measuring treatment response based on tumor shrinkage, which is a valuable measure of antitumor activity of cytotoxic drugs. This method was initially adopted by regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for drug approval. However, anatomic tumor response metrics can be misleading when applied to molecular-targeted therapies or locoregional therapies in HCC. In 2008, a group of experts convened by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) developed a set of guidelines aimed at providing a common framework for the design of clinical trials in HCC and adapted the concept of viable tumor-tumoral tissue showing uptake in arterial phase of contrast-enhanced radiologic imaging techniques-to formally amend RECIST. These amendments conformed the AASLD-JNCI (Journal of the National Cancer Institute) guidelines and are summarized and clarified in the current article. They are referred to herein as the modified RECIST assessment (mRECIST). Further studies are needed to confirm the accuracy of this measurement compared with conventional gold standards such as pathologic studies of explanted livers.
癌症研究的终点是总生存期。然而,目前还使用其他潜在的替代终点,如反应率和无进展生存期。肝细胞癌(HCC)的反应率测量已成为一个有争议的问题。世界卫生组织(WHO)标准低估了实际的反应率;因此,2000 年,欧洲肝脏研究协会(EASL)召集的一个专家组对其进行了修订,以考虑治疗诱导的肿瘤坏死。应用这些指南,反应率与预后预测之间存在关联。最近,实体瘤反应评估标准(RECIST)指南被提议作为一种基于肿瘤缩小来测量治疗反应的方法,这是衡量细胞毒性药物抗肿瘤活性的一个有价值的指标。该方法最初被监管机构(如美国食品和药物管理局(FDA))采用,用于药物批准。然而,当将解剖学肿瘤反应指标应用于 HCC 的分子靶向治疗或局部区域治疗时,可能会产生误导。2008 年,美国肝病研究协会(AASLD)召集的一组专家制定了一套指南,旨在为 HCC 的临床试验设计提供一个共同的框架,并采用了在动脉期显示摄取的存活肿瘤-肿瘤组织的概念-对比增强放射成像技术-正式修订 RECIST。这些修订符合 AASLD-JNCI(国家癌症研究所杂志)指南,并在本文中进行了总结和澄清。它们在此被称为改良的 RECIST 评估(mRECIST)。需要进一步的研究来证实与传统的金标准(如切除肝脏的病理研究)相比,这种测量方法的准确性。