Should CA-125 Response Criteria Be Preferred to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) for Prognostication During Second-Line Chemotherapy of Ovariarf Carcinoma?

2006 ◽  
Vol 2006 ◽  
pp. 108-109
Author(s):  
J.T. Thigpen
Keyword(s):  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Response Criteria ◽  
Ca 125 ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Response Evaluation Criteria

Should CA-125 Response Criteria Be Preferred to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) for Prognostication During Second-Line Chemotherapy of Ovarian Carcinoma?

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (20) ◽  
pp. 4051-4058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Gronlund ◽  
Claus Høgdall ◽  
Jørgen Hilden ◽  
Svend A. Engelholm ◽  
Estrid V.S. Høgdall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Carcinoma ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Response Criteria ◽  
Ca 125 ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Response Evaluation Criteria

Purpose The aim of the study was to compare the prognostic value of a response by the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) Cancer Antigen (CA) -125 response criteria and the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) on survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma receiving second-line chemotherapy. Patients and Methods From a single-institution registry of 527 consecutive patients with primary ovarian carcinoma, 131 records satisfied the inclusion criteria: ovarian carcinoma of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC to IV, first-line chemotherapy with paclitaxel and a platinum compound, refractory or recurrent disease, and second-line chemotherapy consisting of topotecan or paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Univariate and multivariate analyses of survival were performed using the landmark method. Results In patients with measurable disease by RECIST and with assessable disease by the CA-125 criteria (n = 68), the CA-125 criteria were 2.6 times better than the RECIST at disclosing survival. In a multivariate Cox analysis with inclusion of nine potential prognostic parameters, CA-125 response (responders v nonresponders; hazard ratio, 0.21; P < .001) and number of relapse sites (solitary v multiple; hazard ratio, 0.47; P = .020) were identified as contributory prognostic factors for survival, whereas the parameters of RECIST (responders v nonresponders), as well as the remaining variables, had nonsignificant prognostic impact. Conclusion The GCIG CA-125 response criteria are a better prognostic tool than RECIST in second-line treatment with topotecan or paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with ovarian carcinoma.

Practical consensus recommendations - Current role of immune response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria in the management of cancer patients receiving immunotherapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 21-23
Author(s):  
Purvish M. Parikh ◽  
T. P. Sahoo ◽  
Randeep Singh ◽  
Bahl Ankur ◽  
Talvar Vineet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Response ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Consensus Recommendation ◽  
Current Role ◽  
New Class ◽  
Response Evaluation Criteria

Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) are a method used to evaluate and document the response to cancer treatment in solid tumors. The availability of a new class of immuneoncology drugs has resulted in the need to modify RECIST criteria methodology. The first leadership immuno-oncology network (LION) master course brought together experts in oncology and immuno-oncology. Six questions were put to the experts and their opinion, supporting evidence, and experience were discussed to arrive at a practical consensus recommendation. n this nascent field, the availability of a practical consensus recommendation developed by experts in the field is of immense value to the community oncologist and other health-care consultants.

Chemosaturation durch perkutane hepatische Perfusion mit Melphalan bei hepatisch metastasiertem Aderhautmelanom: eine Überlebens- und Sicherheitsanalyse

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (08) ◽  
pp. 576-584
Author(s):  
Cornelia Lieselotte Angelika Dewald ◽  
Jan B. Hinrichs ◽  
Lena Sophie Becker ◽  
Sabine Maschke ◽  
Timo C. Meine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Progressionsfreies Überleben ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Ischämischer Insult ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Response Evaluation Criteria

Ziel Die Chemosaturation mittels perkutaner hepatischer Perfusion mit Melphalan (CS-PHP) ist ein palliatives Therapieverfahren für Patienten mit nicht kurativ behandelbaren Lebertumoren. Die CS-PHP erlaubt eine selektive intrahepatische Anreicherung von hochdosiertem Melphalan bei minimaler systemischer Toxizität durch venöse Hämofiltration. Ziel dieser Studie war es, das Ansprechen und Überleben sowie die Sicherheit der CS-PHP-Prozedur bei Patienten mit leberdominant metastasiertem Aderhautmelanom zu evaluieren. Material und Methoden Gesamtansprechrate (overall response rate, ORR) und Krankheitskontrollrate (disease control rate, DCR) wurden anhand von Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST1.1) ermittelt. Medianes Gesamtüberleben (mOS), medianes progressionsfreies Überleben (mPFS) und hepatisches mPFS (mhPFS) wurden mittels Kaplan-Meier-Schätzer ermittelt. Nebenwirkungen wurden entsprechend der einheitlichen Terminologie-Kriterien für Nebenwirkungen (CTCAE) v5 klassifiziert. Ergebnisse 30 Patienten wurden zwischen Oktober 2014 und Januar 2019 mit 70 Chemosaturationen behandelt. Die ORR betrug 42,3 % und die DCR 80,8 %. Das mOS betrug 12 (95 %-Konfidenzintervall (KI) 7–15) Monate, das mPFS 6 (95 %-KI 4–10) und das mhPFS ebenfalls 6 (95 %-KI 4–13) Monate. Signifikante, aber transiente hämatotoxische Nebenwirkungen waren häufig (87 % Grad-3/4-Thrombozytopenie), hepatische Toxizität bis Leberversagen (n = 1/70) sowie kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen (ischämischer Insult, n = 1/70) waren selten. Schlussfolgerung Das palliative Therapiekonzept der Chemosaturation ist bei Patienten mit hepatisch metastasiertem Aderhautmelanom effektiv. Die interventionelle Prozedur ist sicher, seltene, aber schwerwiegende kardiovaskuläre und hepatische Komplikationen erfordern eine sorgfältige Patientenselektion und intensive Aufmerksamkeit.

Sorafenib in Combination With Gemcitabine in Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Study of the Princess Margaret Hospital Phase II Consortium

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 787-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Welch ◽  
Hal W. Hirte ◽  
Laurie Elit ◽  
Russel J. Schilder ◽  
Lisa Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Ca 125 ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Response Evaluation Criteria

Objectives:Antiangiogenic strategies have demonstrated efficacy in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Sorafenib is a novel multitargeted kinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic activity. Gemcitabine has known activity against EOC. A phase 1 clinical trial of this combination suggested activity in ovarian cancer with no dose-limiting toxicity. This phase 2 study was designed to examine the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and sorafenib in patients with recurrent EOC.Methods:Patients with recurrent EOC after platinum-based chemotherapy and who had subsequently received up to 3 prior chemotherapy regimens were eligible. Gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenous [IV]) was administered weekly for 7 of 8 weeks in the first cycle, then weekly for 3 weeks of each subsequent 4-week cycle. Sorafenib (400 mg p.o. bid) was given continuously. The primary end point for this trial was objective response rate by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary endpoints included Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) CA-125 response, time to progression, overall survival, and toxicity.Results:Forty-three patients were enrolled, and 33 completed at least 1 cycle. Two patients had a partial response (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors objective response rate = 4.7%). Ten patients (23.3%) maintained response or stable disease for at least 6 months. GCIG CA-125 response was 27.9%. The median time to progression was 5.4 months, and the median overall survival was 13.0 months. Hematologic toxicity was common but manageable. The most common nonhematologic adverse events were hand-foot syndrome, fatigue, hypokalemia, and diarrhea.Conclusion:This trial of gemcitabine and sorafenib in recurrent EOC did not meet its primary efficacy end point, but the combination was associated with encouraging rates of prolonged stable disease and CA-125 response.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document