Abstract 168P
Background
In 2010 mRECIST was published in Seminars of Liver Disease for the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) response assessment. It proposed a modification of existing RECIST 1.1 incorporating visible changes and reduction in the arterial enhancement of the HCC tissue and the concept of measuring viable versus not measuring necrotic tissue, better evaluating treatment responses in HCC with CT or MRI.
Methods
Multiple phase III clinical trials were analyzed using both mRECIST and RECIST 1.1 in parallel, which were read separately by blinded independent central read (BICR). The purpose was to compare the overall response rates and complete response rates by the two criteria. 2601 subjects with 13675 post-baseline imaging timepoints were included in this comparison. The Overall Response Rate (ORR) and the Complete Response Rate (CRR) are derived.
Results
Table: 168P
Overall response in 2601 subjects with 13675 time points excluding baseline
mRECIST | RECIST 1.1 | |
CR | 448 | 235 |
PR | 2846 | 2272 |
SD/NN (Stable Disease/Non-CR Non-PD) | 4616 | 5523 |
PD (Progressive Disease) | 5525 | 5449 |
NE | 224 | 180 |
ORR | 24.10% | 18.31% |
CRR | 3.3% | 1.7% |
Conclusions
Our results indicate that: 1.) mRECIST has better ORR and CRR compared to RECIST 1.1. 2.) RECIST 1.1 has more timepoints with Stable Disease SD/NN compared to mRECIST. 3.) mRECIST has more Not Evaluable (NE) timepoints due to more stringent imaging specifications. mRECIST shows almost double the CRR than RECIST 1.1, and the ORR is 33% higher using mRECIST than RECIST 1.1. Stable Disease was observed about 20% more in the RECIST 1.1 analysis, which includes the Non-CR/Non-PD assessment of patients with only non measurable disease for non-target lesions. A reasonable explanation for such a 20% SD discordance being higher with RECIST 1.1 is primarily reflected in the higher number of documented responders assessed with mRECIST. A Non Evaluable (NE) response is more common with mRECIST. Our analysis confirms that mRECIST is more robust in assessing responding patients with CRR and ORR in HCC as it based on measuring the viable tumor component instead of plain linear RECIST 1.1 measurements of its total tumor diameter only.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
24P - The Pink Vans: Bringing cancer screening closer to home
Presenter: Frederic Ivan Ting
Session: e-Poster Display Session
25P - Identification of gene mutations in patients with breast cancer in a region located in the southeast of the European part of Russia
Presenter: Alexander Sultanbaev
Session: e-Poster Display Session
26P - Body mass index and clinical outcomes in Egyptian women with breast cancer: A multi-institutional study
Presenter: Amrou Mamdouh Abdeen Shaaban
Session: e-Poster Display Session
27P - Breast cancer primary site and laterality as predictive factors of prognosis: SEER based analysis for survival
Presenter: Eman Zin Eldin
Session: e-Poster Display Session
28P - Breast cancer care services at Nilai Medical Centre: A Malaysian experience
Presenter: Ratnavelu Kananathan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
29P - Factors affecting breast self-examination (BSE) behaviour among female high school students in Denpasar City, Bali
Presenter: Cindy Trisina
Session: e-Poster Display Session
30P - Male breast cancer: A rural based peripheral cancer center experience
Presenter: SACHIN KHANDELWAL
Session: e-Poster Display Session
31P - The prognostic value of pre-treatment peripheral neutrophil-lymphocyte-ratio (NLR) and its correlation with mutant p53 expression in Indonesian triple negative breast cancer patients
Presenter: Rosita Purwanto
Session: e-Poster Display Session
32P - Clinicopathologic features and prognostic factors in male breast cancer: A single centre experience
Presenter: Izzet Dogan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
33P - FDG-PET predictivity of pathological axillary nodal status in carcinoma breast-upfront and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) setting
Presenter: Krithikaa Sekar
Session: e-Poster Display Session