Abstract
The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidance was introduced in 2000 and revised as RECIST 1.1 in 2009. RECIST was put together with the goal of standardising and simplifying tumor response criteria. The important role of imaging in response assessment was recognised, and specific imaging guidelines were included. The significant imaging-related changes in RECIST 1.1 in comparison to RECIST 1.0 included a reduction in the number of lesions to be addressed, from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of 5 and from 5 to 2 lesions per organ; assessment of lymph node size; and clarification of what constituted disease progression. The definitions of response within the RECIST guidance are addressed within this chapter in addition to the limitations of using tumor size alone as a biomarker for tumor response. Other methods of assessing tumor response such as response to immunotherapy (iRECIST) and response on PET-CT (PERCIST) are also included.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.
Therasse P, Arbuck S, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumours. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16.
Nishino M, Jackman DM, Hatabu H, Yeah BY, Cioffredi L-A, Yap JT, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) guidelines for advanced non–small cell lung cancer: comparison with original RECIST and impact on assessment of tumor response to targeted therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(3):W221–8.
WHO. Handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment, No. 48. Geneva: World Health Offset Organization; 1979.
Suzuki C, Jacobson H, Hatschek T, Torkzad MR, Bodén K, Eriksson-Alm Y, et al. Radiologic measurements of tumor response to treatment: practical approaches and limitations. Radiographics. 2008;28:329–44.
McHugh K, Kao SCS. Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST): problems and need for modifications in paediatric oncology? Br J Radiol. 2003;76:433–6.
McHugh K, Kao SCS. Can paediatric radiologists resist RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors)? Pediatr Radiol. 2003;33(11):739–43.
Chalian H, Tore HG, Horowitz MH, Salem R, Miller FH, Yaghmai V. Radiologic assessment of response to therapy: comparison of RECIST versions 1.1 and 1.0. Radiographics. 2011;31:2093–105.
Padhani AR. The RECIST criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologists. Br J Radiol. 2001;74:983–6.
Gehan EA, Tefft MC. Will there be resistance to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours)? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:179–81.
Ferrari A, Miceli R, Meazza C, Casanova M, Favini F, Morosi C, et al. Comparison of the prognostic value of assessing tumor diameter versus tumor volume at diagnosis or in response to initial chemotherapy in rhabdomyosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(8):1322–8.
Schoot RA, McHugh K, van Rijn RR, Kremer LC, Chisholm JC, Caron HN, et al. Response assessment in pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma: can Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors replace three-dimensional volume assessments? Radiology. 2013;269(3):870–8.
Bagatell R, McHugh K, Naranjo A, Van Ryn C, Kirby C, Brock P, et al. Assessment of primary site response in children with high-risk neuroblastoma: an international multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(7):740–6.
Carceller F, Bautista FJ, Fowkes LA, Marshall LV, Sirvent SI, Chisholm JC, et al. Response assessment in pediatric phase I trials according to RECIST guidelines: survival outcomes, patterns of progression and relevance of changes in tumor measurements. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2016;63:1400–6.
Aghighi M, Boe J, Rosenberg J, Von Eyben R, Gawande RS, Petit P, et al. Three-dimensional radiologic assessment of chemotherapy response in Ewing sarcoma can be used to predict clinical outcome. Radiology. 2016;280:905–15.
MacDonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:1277–80.
Warren KE, Poussaint TY, Vezina G, Hargrave D, Packer RJ, Goldman S, et al. Challenges with defining response to antitumor agents in pediatric neuro-oncology: a report from the response assessment in pediatric neuro-oncology (RAPNO) working group. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013;60:1397–401.
Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, Cavalli F, Schwartz LH, Zucca E, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging and response assessment in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3059–68.
Sandlund JT, Guillerman RP, Perkins SL, Pinkerton CR, Rosolen A, Patte C, et al. International pediatric non-Hodgkin lymphoma response criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(18):2106–11.
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(S1):1225–50.
Tirkes T, Hollar MA, Tann M, Kohli MD, Akisik F, Sandrasegaran K. Response criteria in oncologic imaging: review of traditional and new criteria. Radiographics. 2013;33:1323–41.
Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, Shipp MA, Fisher RI, Connors JM, et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. NCI sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(4):1244.
Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):579–86.
Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, Macapinlac HA, Burgess MA, Patel SR, et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastastic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1753–9.
Choi H. Response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Oncologist. 2008;13(Suppl 2):4–7.
Dietrich C, Hartung E, Ignee A. The use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in patients with GIST metastases that are negative in CT and PET. Ultraschall Med. 2008;29(Suppl 5):276–7.
Smith AD, Lieber ML, Shah SN. Assessment tumor response and detecting recurrence in metastatic renal cell carcinoma on targeted therapy: importance of size and attenuation on contrast-enhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(1):157–65.
Smith AD, Shah SN, Rini BI, Liber ML, Remer EM. Morphology attenuation, size, and structure (MASS) criteria: assessing response and predicting clinical outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma on antiangiogenic targeted therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(6):1470–8.
Vancini C, Alfano DF, Abousiam RN, Totaro M, Diago NMD, Giganti M. Comparison of radiological criteria (RECIST – MASS – SACT – Choi) in antiangiogenic therapy of renal cell carcinoma. Univ J of Public Health. 2016;4(5):239–43.
Tan D, Thomas GV, Garrett MD, Banerji U, de Bono J, Kaye SB, et al. Biomarker-driven early clinical trials in oncology: a paradigm shift in drug development. Cancer J. 2009;15:406–20.
Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O’Day S, Weber JS, Hamid O, Lebbé C, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(23):7412–20.
Hodi FS, Butler M, Oble DA, Seiden MV, Haluska FG, Kruse A, et al. Immunologic and clinical effects of antibody blockade of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 in previously vaccinated cancer patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:3005–10.
Hodi FS, Oble DA, Drappatz J, Velazquez EF, Ramaiya N, Ramakrishna N, et al. CTLA-4 blockade with ipilimumab induces significant clinical benefits in a female with melanoma metastases to the CNS. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5:557–61.
Seymour L, Boggaerts J, Perrone A, Ford R, Schwartz LH, Mandrekar S, et al. iRECIST: guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18:e143–51.
Olsen ØE, Jeanes AC, Sebire NJ, Roebuck DJ, Michalski AJ, Risdon RA, et al. Changes in computed tomography features following preoperative chemotherapy for nephroblastoma: relation to histopathological classification. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:990–4.
Malempati S, Weigel B, Ingle AM, Ahern CH, Carroll JM, Roberts CT, Reid JM, Schmechel S, Voss SD, Cho SY, Chen HX, Krailo MD, Adamson PC, Blaney SM. Phase I/II trial and pharmacokinetic study of cixutumumab in pediatric patients with refractory solid tumors and Ewing sarcoma: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(3):256–62. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.37.4355.
Fowkes LA, Koh DM, Collins DJ, Jerome NP, MacVicar D, Chua SC, et al. Childhood extracranial neoplasms: the role of imaging in drug development and clinical trials. Pediatr Radiol. 2015;45:1600–15.
Smith TA. FDG uptake, tumour characteristics and response to therapy: a review. Nucl Med Commun. 1998;19:97–105.
Park JR, Bagatell R, Cohn SL, Pearson AD, Villablanca JG, Berthold F, et al. Revisions to the international neuroblastoma response criteria (INRC): a consensus statement from the NCI-clinical trials planning meeting. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(22):2580–7.
Mullen EA, Chi YY, Hibbitts E, Anderson JR, Steacy KJ, Geller JI, Green DM, Khanna G, Malogolowkin MH, Grundy PE, Fernandez CV, Dome JS. Impact of surveillance imaging modality on survival after recurrence in patients with favorable-histology Wilms Tumor: a report from the children’s oncology group. J Clin Oncol. 2018:JCO1800076. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.00076. [Epub ahead of print].
Saini S. Radiologic measurement of tumor size in clinical trials: past, present, and future. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:333–4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McHugh, K., Kao, S. (2019). Tumor Response Assessment: RECIST and Beyond. In: Voss, S., McHugh, K. (eds) Imaging in Pediatric Oncology. Pediatric Oncology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03777-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03777-2_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03776-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03777-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)