Cancer Response Criteria and Bone Metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA and PERCIST
Colleen M Costelloe, Hubert H Chuang, John E Madewell, Naoto T Ueno, Colleen M Costelloe, Hubert H Chuang, John E Madewell, Naoto T Ueno
Abstract
Response criteria represent the standard by which the efficacy of therapeutic agents is determined in cancer trials. The most widely used criteria are based on the anatomic measurement of solid tumors. Because bone metastases are typically located in irregularly shaped bones and are difficult to measure with rulers, they have been previously considered unmeasurable disease. New developments in cancer response criteria have increased awareness of the importance of the response of bone metastases to therapy. The recently updated Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) now consider bone metastases with soft tissue masses > 10 mm to be measurable disease. Response criteria specific to bone metastases have been developed at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDA criteria) and can be used to assess therapeutic response in numerous types of bone metastases. Functional imaging criteria, such as the recently developed Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) allow response to be measured in the absence of anatomic change through assessment of metabolic activity. As monitoring tumor response of bone metastases becomes more important in the management of cancer, so does the demand on radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians for accurate interpretation of the behavior of these lesions. This article reviews anatomic, bone, and metabolic response criteria, providing illustrations for the interpretation of therapy-induced change in bone metastases.
Keywords: MDA; PERCIST; RECIST 1.1; bone; metastasis; response criteria.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exists.
Figures
References
- Cancer Facts & Figures 2010. American Cancer Society; .
- Abrams HL, Spiro R, Goldstein N. Metastases in carcinoma; analysis of 1000 autopsied cases. Cancer. 1950;3:74–85.
- Coleman RE. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:6243s–6249s.
- WHO. WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization Offset Publication; 1979.
- Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer. 1981;47:207–214.
- Buyse M, Thirion P, Carlson RW, Burzykowski T, Molenberghs G, Piedbois P. Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Meta-Analysis Group in Cancer. Lancet. 2000;356:373–378.
- El-Maraghi RH, Eisenhauer EA. Review of phase II trial designs used in studies of molecular targeted agents: outcomes and predictors of success in phase III. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1346–1354.
- Paesmans M, Sculier JP, Libert P. et al.Response to chemotherapy has predictive value for further survival of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: 10 years experience of the European Lung Cancer Working Party. Eur J Cancer. 1997;33:2326–2332.
- Bruzzi P, Del Mastro L, Sormani MP. et al.Objective response to chemotherapy as a potential surrogate end point of survival in metastatic breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5117–5125.
- Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA. et al.New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–216.
- Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J. et al.New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228–247.
- Tonkin K, Tritchler D, Tannock I. Criteria of tumor response used in clinical trials of chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3:870–875.
- Baar J, Tannock I. Analyzing the same data in two ways: a demonstration model to illustrate the reporting and misreporting of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:969–978.
- Aisen AM, Martel W, Braunstein EM, McMillin KI, Phillips WA, Kling TF. MRI and CT evaluation of primary bone and soft-tissue tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;146:749–756.
- Harkens KL, Moore TE, Yuh WT. et al.Gadolinium-enhanced MRI of soft tissue masses. Australas Radiol. 1993;37:30–34.
- Reuther G, Mutschler W. Detection of local recurrent disease in musculoskeletal tumors: magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography. Skeletal Radiol. 1990;19:85–90.
- Hayward JL, Carbone PP, Heusen JC, Kumaoka S, Segaloff A, Rubens RD. Assessment of response to therapy in advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1977;35:292–298.
- Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2942–2953.
- Amoroso V, Pittiani F, Grisanti S. et al.Osteoblastic flare in a patient with advanced gastric cancer after treatment with pemetrexed and oxaliplatin: implications for response assessment with RECIST criteria. BMC Cancer. 2007;7:94.
- Schneider JA, Divgi CR, Scott AM. et al.Flare on bone scintigraphy following Taxol chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:1748–1752.
- Janicek MJ, Hayes DF, Kaplan WD. Healing flare in skeletal metastases from breast cancer. Radiology. 1994;192:201–204.
- Vogel CL, Schoenfelder J, Shemano I, Hayes DF, Gams RA. Worsening bone scan in the evaluation of antitumor response during hormonal therapy of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1123–1128.
- Levenson RM, Sauerbrunn BJ, Bates HR, Newman RD, Eddy JL, Ihde DC. Comparative value of bone scintigraphy and radiography in monitoring tumor response in systemically treated prostatic carcinoma. Radiology. 1983;146:513–518.
- Chao HS, Chang CP, Chiu CH, Chu LS, Chen YM, Tsai CM. Bone scan flare phenomenon in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib. Clin Nucl Med. 2009;34:346–349.
- Hamaoka T, Costelloe CM, Madewell JE. et al.Tumour response interpretation with new tumour response criteria vs the World Health Organisation criteria in patients with bone-only metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:651–657.
- Bos R, van Der Hoeven JJ, van Der Wall E. et al.Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:379–387.
- Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):122S–150S.
- Michaelis LC, Ratain MJ. Measuring response in a post-RECIST world: from black and white to shades of grey. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:409–414.
- Parulekar WR, Eisenhauer EA. Novel endpoints and design of early clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2002;13(Suppl 4):139–143.
- Schilsky RL. End points in cancer clinical trials and the drug approval process. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8:935–938.
- Benjamin RS, Choi H, Macapinlac HA. et al.We should desist using RECIST, at least in GIST. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1760–1764.
- Van den Abbeele AD. The lessons of GIST--PET and PET/CT: a new paradigm for imaging. Oncologist. 2008;13(Suppl 2):8–13.
- Dose Schwarz J, Bader M, Jenicke L, Hemminger G, Janicke F, Avril N. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer using sequential 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1144–1150.
- Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW. et al.Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1676–1688.
- Brucher BL, Weber W, Bauer M. et al.Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2001;233:300–309.
- Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Maish M. et al.2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;101:1776–1785.
- Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F. et al.Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:900–908.
- Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP. et al.Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1285–1292.
- Hellwig D, Graeter TP, Ukena D, Georg T, Kirsch CM, Schafers HJ. Value of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after induction therapy of locally advanced bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;128:892–899.
- Hawkins DS, Conrad EU3rd, Butrynski JE, Schuetze SM, Eary JF. [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography response is associated with outcome for extremity osteosarcoma in children and young adults. Cancer. 2009;115:3519–3525.
- Costelloe CM, Macapinlac HA, Madewell JE. et al.18F-FDG PET/CT as an indicator of progression-free and overall survival in osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:340–347.
- Weber WA, Wieder H. Monitoring chemotherapy and radiotherapy of solid tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(Suppl 1):27–37.
- Stroobants S, Goeminne J, Seegers M. et al.18FDG-Positron emission tomography for the early prediction of response in advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with imatinib mesylate (Glivec) Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:2012–2020.
- Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:2101–2111.
- Gayed I, Vu T, Iyer R. et al.The role of 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:17–21.
- Scott AM, Gunawardana DH, Bartholomeusz D, Ramshaw JE, Lin P. PET changes management and improves prognostic stratification in patients with head and neck cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1593–1600.
- Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J. et al.Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:32–39.
- Scott AM, Gunawardana DH, Kelley B. et al.PET changes management and improves prognostic stratification in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1451–1457.
- Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U. et al.Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773–1782.
- Boellaard R, Oyen WJ, Hoekstra CJ. et al.The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:2320–2333.
- Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S. et al.Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059–1066.
- Karrison TG, Maitland ML, Stadler WM, Ratain MJ. Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:1455–1461.
- Stahl A, Ott K, Schwaiger M, Weber WA. Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:1471–1478.
- Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847–850.
- Sugawara Y, Zasadny KR, Neuhoff AW, Wahl RL. Reevaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight and methods for correction. Radiology. 1999;213:521–525.
- Erdi YE, Macapinlac H, Rosenzweig KE. et al.Use of PET to monitor the response of lung cancer to radiation treatment. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27:861–866.
- Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology. 2008;247:189–196.
- Benz MR, Allen-Auerbach MS, Eilber FC. et al.Combined assessment of metabolic and volumetric changes for assessment of tumor response in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1579–1584.
- Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T. et al.Tumor Treatment Response Based on Visual and Quantitative Changes in Global Tumor Glycolysis Using PET-FDG Imaging. The Visual Response Score and the Change in Total Lesion Glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159–171.
- Nakamoto Y, Zasadny KR, Minn H, Wahl RL. Reproducibility of common semi-quantitative parameters for evaluating lung cancer glucose metabolism with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose. Mol Imaging Biol. 2002;4:171–178.
- Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T. et al.Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: a means for determining longterm outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:1–7.
- Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K, Ishiwata K, Tamahashi N, Ido T. Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:1972–1980.
Source: PubMed