TY - JOUR
T1 - RECIST 1.1 - Standardisation and disease-specific adaptations
T2 - Perspectives from the RECIST Working Group
AU - Schwartz, Lawrence H.
AU - Seymour, Lesley
AU - Litière, Saskia
AU - Ford, Robert
AU - Gwyther, Stephen
AU - Mandrekar, Sumithra
AU - Shankar, Lalitha
AU - Bogaerts, Jan
AU - Chen, Alice
AU - Dancey, Janet
AU - Hayes, Wendy
AU - Hodi, F. Stephen
AU - Hoekstra, Otto S.
AU - Huang, Erich P.
AU - Lin, Nancy
AU - Liu, Yan
AU - Therasse, Patrick
AU - Wolchok, Jedd D.
AU - De Vries, Elisabeth
N1 - Funding Information:
Canadian Cancer Trials Group participation was supported by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (grant #021039 ). This publication was supported by the EORTC Cancer Research Fund and by the National Cancer Institute grant number 5U10-CA11488-45 .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2016/7/1
Y1 - 2016/7/1
N2 - Radiologic imaging of disease sites plays a pivotal role in the management of patients with cancer. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST), introduced in 2000, and modified in 2009, has become the de facto standard for assessment of response in solid tumours in patients on clinical trials. The RECIST Working Group considers the ability of the global oncology community to implement and adopt updates to RECIST in a timely manner to be critical. Updates to RECIST must be tested, validated and implemented in a standardised, methodical manner in response to therapeutic and imaging technology advances as well as experience gained by users. This was the case with the development of RECIST 1.1, where an expanded data warehouse was developed to test and validate modifications. Similar initiatives are ongoing, testing RECIST in the evaluation of response to non-cytotoxic agents, immunotherapies, as well as in specific diseases. The RECIST Working Group has previously outlined the level of evidence considered necessary to formally and fully validate new imaging markers as an appropriate end-point for clinical trials. Achieving the optimal level of evidence desired is a difficult feat for phase III trials; this involves a meta-analysis of multiple prospective, randomised multicentre clinical trials. The rationale for modifications should also be considered; the modifications may be proposed to improve surrogacy, to provide a more mechanistic imaging technique, or be designed to improve reproducibility of the imaging biomarker. Here, we present the commonly described modifications of RECIST, each of which is associated with different levels of evidence and validation.
AB - Radiologic imaging of disease sites plays a pivotal role in the management of patients with cancer. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST), introduced in 2000, and modified in 2009, has become the de facto standard for assessment of response in solid tumours in patients on clinical trials. The RECIST Working Group considers the ability of the global oncology community to implement and adopt updates to RECIST in a timely manner to be critical. Updates to RECIST must be tested, validated and implemented in a standardised, methodical manner in response to therapeutic and imaging technology advances as well as experience gained by users. This was the case with the development of RECIST 1.1, where an expanded data warehouse was developed to test and validate modifications. Similar initiatives are ongoing, testing RECIST in the evaluation of response to non-cytotoxic agents, immunotherapies, as well as in specific diseases. The RECIST Working Group has previously outlined the level of evidence considered necessary to formally and fully validate new imaging markers as an appropriate end-point for clinical trials. Achieving the optimal level of evidence desired is a difficult feat for phase III trials; this involves a meta-analysis of multiple prospective, randomised multicentre clinical trials. The rationale for modifications should also be considered; the modifications may be proposed to improve surrogacy, to provide a more mechanistic imaging technique, or be designed to improve reproducibility of the imaging biomarker. Here, we present the commonly described modifications of RECIST, each of which is associated with different levels of evidence and validation.
KW - Modifications
KW - RECIST
KW - Tumour response
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84969945374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84969945374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.03.082
DO - 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.03.082
M3 - Article
C2 - 27237360
AN - SCOPUS:84969945374
SN - 0959-8049
VL - 62
SP - 138
EP - 145
JO - European Journal of Cancer
JF - European Journal of Cancer
ER -