Early radiological response evaluation with response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 1.1 stratifies survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with lenvatinib.
Choi criteria
hepatocellular carcinoma
lenvatinib
modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors
response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 1.1
Journal
JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology
ISSN: 2397-9070
Titre abrégé: JGH Open
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101730833
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
23
06
2020
revised:
20
08
2020
accepted:
05
09
2020
entrez:
15
12
2020
pubmed:
16
12
2020
medline:
16
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lenvatinib (LEN) has an antitumor effect with an early reduction in contrast enhancement for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to reveal the most useful radiological response evaluation for overall survival (OS) in patients treated with LEN. Patients receiving LEN therapy ( The median OS was 469 days. The RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, and Choi criteria identified 14 (22.5%), 30 (48.3%), and 33 (53.2%) patients with an objective response, respectively. In the univariate analysis, Child-Pugh class B, major vascular invasion, and high alpha-fetoprotein (>200) were statistically significant poor prognostic factors. Radiological response was a significantly better prognostic factor in each criterion (RECIST, mRECIST, and Choi). In the multivariate analysis, radiological response evaluated by RECIST (hazard ratio, 0.259; 95% confidence interval, 0.0723-0.928; RECIST 1.1 was useful even as early therapeutic evaluation for HCC patients treated with LEN. Understanding the characteristics of radiological response over time may contribute to improving the prognosis of patients with HCC.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIM
OBJECTIVE
Lenvatinib (LEN) has an antitumor effect with an early reduction in contrast enhancement for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to reveal the most useful radiological response evaluation for overall survival (OS) in patients treated with LEN.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients receiving LEN therapy (
RESULTS
RESULTS
The median OS was 469 days. The RECIST 1.1, mRECIST, and Choi criteria identified 14 (22.5%), 30 (48.3%), and 33 (53.2%) patients with an objective response, respectively. In the univariate analysis, Child-Pugh class B, major vascular invasion, and high alpha-fetoprotein (>200) were statistically significant poor prognostic factors. Radiological response was a significantly better prognostic factor in each criterion (RECIST, mRECIST, and Choi). In the multivariate analysis, radiological response evaluated by RECIST (hazard ratio, 0.259; 95% confidence interval, 0.0723-0.928;
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
RECIST 1.1 was useful even as early therapeutic evaluation for HCC patients treated with LEN. Understanding the characteristics of radiological response over time may contribute to improving the prognosis of patients with HCC.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33319054
doi: 10.1002/jgh3.12420
pii: JGH312420
pmc: PMC7731835
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1183-1190Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. JGH Open: An open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology published by Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Références
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 31;10(7):e0133488
pubmed: 26230853
Hepatology. 2018 Aug;68(2):723-750
pubmed: 29624699
Radiology. 2017 Oct;285(1):134-146
pubmed: 28609205
Int J Cancer. 2008 Feb 1;122(3):664-71
pubmed: 17943726
Anticancer Res. 2019 Sep;39(9):5149-5156
pubmed: 31519627
J Clin Oncol. 2007 May 1;25(13):1753-9
pubmed: 17470865
Lancet. 2018 Mar 24;391(10126):1163-1173
pubmed: 29433850
J Hepatol. 2020 Feb;72(2):288-306
pubmed: 31954493
Hepatol Res. 2019 Oct;49(10):1109-1113
pubmed: 31336394
Eur Radiol. 2001;11(4):580-4
pubmed: 11354750
Anticancer Res. 2020 Apr;40(4):2283-2290
pubmed: 32234927
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jul 24;359(4):378-90
pubmed: 18650514
Liver Cancer. 2019 Oct;8(5):299-311
pubmed: 31768341
Eur J Cancer. 2009 Jan;45(2):228-47
pubmed: 19097774
Hepatol Res. 2019 Jan;49(1):111-117
pubmed: 30144256
Liver Cancer. 2020 Jan;9(1):73-83
pubmed: 32071911
Am J Clin Oncol. 1982 Dec;5(6):649-55
pubmed: 7165009
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018 Jan;43(1):101-110
pubmed: 29038857
Radiology. 2016 Jul;280(1):78-87
pubmed: 26824712
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Jan;85(1):103-112
pubmed: 26724654
Semin Liver Dis. 1999;19(3):329-38
pubmed: 10518312
Liver Cancer. 2018 Sep;7(3):215-224
pubmed: 30319981
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Mar 25;12(4):
pubmed: 32218295
Oncology. 2020;98(5):295-302
pubmed: 32097925
Semin Liver Dis. 2010 Feb;30(1):52-60
pubmed: 20175033
Cancer Med. 2019 Jul;8(8):3719-3728
pubmed: 31127698
Hepatol Res. 2020 Jan;50(1):75-83
pubmed: 31660700
Hepatol Res. 2020 Jan;50(1):137-143
pubmed: 31349377
Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2018 Nov;17(11):1095-1105
pubmed: 30264594
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 20;15(4):e0231828
pubmed: 32310967
Clin J Gastroenterol. 2020 Oct;13(5):839-843
pubmed: 31974811
Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Dec 1;15(23):7412-20
pubmed: 19934295
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Jun;3(6):424-432
pubmed: 29631810
Oncol Lett. 2013 Dec;6(6):1707-1712
pubmed: 24260066
J Hepatol. 2018 Jul;69(1):182-236
pubmed: 29628281
Liver Int. 2017 Jul;37(7):1047-1055
pubmed: 28066978
Hepatology. 2018 Jan;67(1):358-380
pubmed: 28130846
Ann Oncol. 2019 May 1;30(5):871-873
pubmed: 30715202
Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Sep 1;14(17):5459-65
pubmed: 18765537
Oncology. 2019;97(2):75-81
pubmed: 31242488
Liver Int. 2020 Apr;40(4):968-976
pubmed: 32064740
Oncologist. 2014 Apr;19(4):394-402
pubmed: 24652387
Vasc Cell. 2014 Sep 06;6:18
pubmed: 25197551
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Nov;48(5):1169-1171
pubmed: 30347132
J Hepatol. 2017 Jun;66(6):1166-1172
pubmed: 28131794