Response Evaluation and Survival Prediction Following PD-1 Inhibitor in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Comparison of the RECIST 1.1, iRECIST, and mRECIST Criteria

Tumor response assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immunotherapy: imaging biomarkers for clinical decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of 1D and 3D tumor response assessment for predicting median overall survival (mOS) in patients who underwent immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Patients with HCC who underwent immunotherapy between 2017 and 2023 and received multi-phasic contrast-enhanced MRIs pre- and post-treatment were included in this retrospective study. Tumor response was measured using 1D, RECIST 1.1, and mRECIST, and 3D, volumetric, and percentage quantitative EASL (vqEASL and %qEASL). Patients were grouped into disease control vs progression and responders vs non-responders. Kaplan-Meier curves analyzed with log-rank tests assessed the predictive value for mOS. Cox regression modeling evaluated the association of clinical baseline parameters with mOS.

RESULTS

This study included 37 patients (mean age, 69.1 years [SD, 8.0]; 33 men). The mOS was 16.9 months. 3D vqEASL and %qEASL successfully stratified patients into disease control and progression (vqEASL: HR 0.21, CI: 0.55-0.08, p < 0.001; %qEASL: HR 0.18, CI: 0.83-0.04, p = 0.013), as well as responder and nonresponder (vqEASL: HR 0.25, CI: 0.08-0.74, p = 0.007; %qEASL: HR 0.17, CI: 0.04-0.72, p = 0.007) for predicting mOS. The 1D criteria, mRECIST stratified into disease control and progression only (HR 0.24, CI: 0.65-0.09, p = 0.002), and RECIST 1.1 showed no predictive value in either stratification. Multivariate Cox regression identified alpha-fetoprotein > 500 ng/mL as a predictor for poor mOS (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The 3D quantitative enhancement-based response assessment tool qEASL can predict overall survival in patients undergoing immunotherapy for HCC and could identify non-responders.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Using 3D quantitative enhancement-based tumor response criteria (qEASL), radiologists' predictions of tumor response in patients undergoing immunotherapy for HCC can be further improved.

KEY POINTS

MRI-based tumor response criteria predict immunotherapy survival benefits in HCC patients. 3D tumor response assessment methods surpass current evaluation criteria in predicting overall survival during HCC immunotherapy. Enhancement-based 3D tumor response criteria are robust prognosticators of survival for HCC patients on immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy for lung cancer

Immune checkpoint blockers have transformed non-small-cell lung cancer treatment, but they can lead to autoimmune and inflammatory side effects, leading to the concurrent use of immunosuppressive treatments. In this analysis, we delve into the potential of antibodies checkpoint blockade, focusing on CTLA-4 inhibition using ipilimumab, as a groundbreaking cancer immunotherapy. We also concentrate on the role of biomarkers, particularly PD-L1 activity and mutation significance, in predicting the response to programmed cell death protein 1 blockage and the prevalence of side effects associated with immune-related side effects. In describing the patterns of cancer response to immunotherapy, we underline the limitations of response assessment criteria like RECIST and World Health Organization. We also stress the necessity of ongoing studies and clinical trials, standardized guidelines, and additional research to improve response assessment in the era of immunotherapy.

Influence of Tumor Cavitation on Assessing the Clinical Benefit of Anti-PD1 or PD-L1 Inhibitors in Advanced Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

A considerable portion of lung squamous cell cancer (LUSC) displays radiographic signs of cavitation. The cavitation of lesions is not accounted for in the prevailing Evaluation Criteria of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 or iRECIST in lung cancer. We hypothesized that cavitation might alter response assessment in these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective radiologic review of 785 patients with stage IV LUSC treated with PD-1/PD-L1 antibody combined with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. 131 patients exhibited cavitation lesions pre- or after-treatment. Response was assessed by RECIST v1.1 and a modified Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) guidelines in which the longest diameter of any cavity was subtracted from the overall longest diameter of that lesion to measure target lesions. The response rate and PFS and OS between mRECIST and RECIST v1.1 were compared. Survival curves of different response categories in each criterion were prepared using the method of Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Weighted κ statistics were used to assess interobserver reproducibilities and to compare response rates. The chi-square test confirmed the relationship between PD-L1 expression and post-treatment cavitation.

RESULTS

Notable cavitation of pulmonary lesions was seen in 16.7% of 785 patients treated with immunotherapy combined with platinum-based chemotherapy. Using the mRECIST for response assessment resulted in a higher response rate than RECIST v1.1 (66% vs. 57%). mRECIST might better identify patients with PFS and OS benefits who have cavitation. The chi-square test revealed a marginally significant difference between PD-L1 expression and tumor cavitation. Interobserver reproducibility of mRECIST for tumor cavitation evaluation was acceptable (the weighted k coefficients for mRECIST criteria was 0.821).

CONCLUSION

Cavitation lesions at baseline and after checkpoint treatment are common in LUSC patients. mRECIST records a significantly higher response rate than RECIST for these LUSC patients. Response assessment might be improved by incorporating cavitation into volume assessment for target lesions. These results may inform further modifications to RECIST V1.1 to better reflect efficacy with immunotherapy.

Efficacy of mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab regimen in advanced colorectal cancer after deep hyperthermia: a single-center retrospective study

Background

This study aimed to explore the clinical efficacy and safety of a modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin + leucovorin + 5-fluorouracil) plus bevacizumab regimen after deep hyperthermia in advanced colorectal cancer.

Methods

A total of 80 colorectal cancer patients treated at our hospital were selected as research subjects. According to the random number table method, patients were divided into a control group (mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab) and a combination group (mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab after deep hyperthermia treatment), with 40 patients in each group. After six cycles of treatment, the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), levels of serum tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), vascular epidermal growth factor (VEGF), Karnofsky performance status (KPS) scores, and the occurrence of adverse events were compared between the two groups.

Results

After six cycles of treatment, the ORR in the combination group was higher than that in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The DCR in the combination group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P<0.05). The serum CEA levels in the control and combination groups after treatment were significantly lower than those before treatment, and the serum CEA and VEGF levels in the combination group were significantly lower than those in the control group (all P<0.001). The KPS scores in both groups after treatment were higher than those before treatment, and the KPS scores in the combination group after treatment were significantly higher than those in the control group (all P<0.001). The incidence of fatigue and pain in the combination group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab after deep hyperthermia is effective in advanced colorectal cancer patients, which can effectively improve their quality of life, and the adverse events are controllable and tolerable. A randomized or prospective trial will be required to further prove these data and explore its potentiality, especially if compared to conventional treatment.

Overview of approaches to estimate real-world disease progression in lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials of novel treatments for solid tumors normally measure disease progression using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. However, novel, scalable approaches to estimate disease progression using real-world data are needed to advance cancer outcomes research. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize examples from the existing literature on approaches to estimate real-world disease progression and their relative strengths and limitations, using lung cancer as a case study.

METHODS

A narrative literature review was conducted in PubMed to identify articles that used approaches to estimate real-world disease progression in lung cancer patients. Data abstracted included data source, approach used to estimate real-world progression, and comparison to a selected gold standard (if applicable).

RESULTS

A total of 40 articles were identified from 2008 to 2022. Five approaches to estimate real-world disease progression were identified including manual abstraction of medical records, natural language processing of clinical notes and/or radiology reports, treatment-based algorithms, changes in tumor volume, and delta radiomics-based approaches. The accuracy of these progression approaches were assessed using different methods, including correlations between real-world endpoints and overall survival for manual abstraction (Spearman rank ρ = 0.61-0.84) and area under the curve for natural language processing approaches (area under the curve = 0.86-0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world disease progression has been measured in several observational studies of lung cancer. However, comparing the accuracy of methods across studies is challenging, in part, because of the lack of a gold standard and the different methods used to evaluate accuracy. Concerted efforts are needed to define a gold standard and quality metrics for real-world data.

Efficacy and safety analysis of TACE + sunitinib vs. sunitinib in the treatment of unresectable advanced renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Since renal cell carcinoma(RCC) is insensitive to conventional chemoradiotherapy, molecularly targeted drugs are commonly used treatments for unresectable advanced RCC. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of TACE + sunitinib vs. sunitinib in the treatment of unresectable advanced RCC.

METHODS

This study included 98 patients with unresectable advanced RCC who were treated in Union Hospital from January 2015 to December 2018, and they met the criteria. They were divided into two groups: TACE + Sunitinib group (N = 47) and Sunitinib group (N = 51). We conducted a retrospective study to analyze the efficacy and safety of the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

(1)TACE + Sunitinib group: 4 patients (8.5%) achieved CR, 27 patients (57.5%) achieved PR, 9 patients (19.1%) achieved SD, and 7 patients (14.9%) achieved PD. Sunitinib group, 0 patients (0%) achieved CR, 20 patients (39.2%) achieved PR, 14 patients (27.5%) achieved SD, and 17 patients (33.3%) achieved PD. (P = 0.017) (2)ORR: TACE + sunitinib group, 66.0%; sunitinib group, 39.2%. (P = 0.009) (3)DCR: TACE + sunitinib group, 85.1%; sunitinib group, 66.7%. (P = 0.038) (4) In the TACE + sunitinib group, mPFS was 15.6 months, mOS was 35.0 months; in the sunitinib group, the mPFS was 10.9 months, mOS was 25.7 months. (P < 0.001) (5) The incidence of abdominal pain, fever, and vomiting was higher in the TACE + sunitinib group than in the sunitinib group (abdominal pain: 55.3% vs. 13.7%; fever: 61.7% vs. 7.8%; vomiting: 40.4% vs. 19.6%; P < 0.05). The technical success rate of TACE in TACE + Sunitinib group is 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The TACE + sunitinib group had higher ORR and DCR, longer OS and PFS than the sunitinib alone group. TACE combined with sunitinib can play a complementary role and is a safe and effective treatment for advanced RCC.

TACE versus TACE + entecavir versus TACE + tenofovir in the treatment of HBV associated hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

At present, there are a variety of antiviral drugs for HBV in clinical practice, but there is no standard scheme for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization(TACE) combined with antiviral drugs. The aim of this study was to investigate whether TACE must be combined with antiviral therapy in patients of HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC). Meanwhile, the efficacy and safety of TACE combined with entecavir and TACE combined with tenofovir in the treatment of HBV-related HCC were compared.

METHOD

This study included 536 patients with HBV-related HCC who underwent TACE in Union Hospital from March 2017 to March 2020, and they met the criteria. They were divided into three groups: control group (N = 212): TACE alone; Entecavir group (N = 220): TACE combined with entecavir; and Tenofovir group (N = 228): TACE combined with tenofovir. We conducted a retrospective study to analyze the efficacy and safety of the three groups of patients.

RESULTS

Objective response rate(ORR): 29.2% in control group, 54.1% in entecavir group, and 63.2% in tenofovir group (P < 0.05). Disease control rate(DCR): 63.7% in control group, 80.9% in entecavir group, and 88.1% in tenofovir group (P < 0.05). Median overall survival(mOS): control group, 12.2 months; entecavir group, 17.3 months; tenofovir group, 22.5 months (p < 0.05). Median progression-free survival (mPFS): control group, 9.3 months; entecavir group, 15.5 months; tenofovir group, 16.6 months (p < 0.05). At 6 months, there was an increase in creatinine(Cr) and a decrease in glomeruar filtration rate(GFR) in tenofovir group, which were statistically different from control and entecavir groups (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TACE combined with entecavir and TACE combined with tenofovir had higher ORR and DCR, longer OS and PFS than TACE alone. The OS of TACE combined with tenofovir was higher than that of TACE combined with entecavir. TACE combined with tenofovir is a safe strategy, but we cannot completely ignore the impact of tenofovir on renal function.

Chemotherapy response evaluation using diffusion weighted MRI in Ewing Sarcoma: A single center experience

BACKGROUND

Non-invasive biomarkers for early chemotherapeutic response in Ewing sarcoma family of tumors (ESFT) are useful for optimizing existing treatment protocol.

PURPOSE

To assess the role of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the early evaluation of chemotherapeutic response in ESFT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 28 patients (mean age = 17.2 ± 5.6 years) with biopsy proven ESFT were analyzed prospectively. Patients underwent MRI acquisition on a 1.5-T scanner at three time points: before starting neoadjuvant chemotherapy (baseline), after first cycle chemotherapy (early time point), and after completion of chemotherapy (last time point). RECIST 1.1 criteria was used to evaluate the response to chemotherapy and patients were categorized as responders (complete and partial response) and non-responders (stable and progressive disease). Tumor diameter, absolute apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and normalized ADC (nADC) values in the tumor were measured. Baseline parameters and relative percentage change of parameters after first cycle chemotherapy were assessed for early detection of chemotherapy response.

RESULTS

The responder:non-responder ratio was 21:7. At baseline, ADC ([0.864 ± 0.266 vs. 0.977 ± 0.246]) × 10^-3mm²/s; P = 0.205) and nADC ([0.740 ± 0.254 vs. 0.925 ± 0.262] × 10^-3mm²/s; P = 0.033) among responders was lower than the non-responders and predicted response to chemotherapy with AUCs of 0.6 and 0.735, respectively. At the early time point, tumor diameter (27% ± 14% vs. 4.6% ± 10%; P = 0.002) showed a higher reduction and ADC (75% ± 44% vs. 52% ± 72%; P = 0.039) and nADC (81% ± 44% vs. 48% ± 67%; P = 0.008) showed a higher increase in mean values among responders than the non-responders and identified chemotherapy response with AUC of 0.890, 0.723, and 0.756, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Baseline nADC and its change after the first cycle of chemotherapy can be used as non-invasive surrogate markers of early chemotherapeutic response in patients with ESFT.

SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with poor response to transarterial chemoembolization

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy combined with apatinib exhibits synergistic anti-tumor effect, while the application of simultaneous integrated boost intensity modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) combined with apatinib in HCC patients is scarce. Hence, this study aimed to explore the treatment response, survival, and safety profile of the SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib in unresectable HCC (uHCC) patients.

METHODS

A total of 19 uHCC patients with deficient response to transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), who scheduled for SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib treatment were enrolled. The SIB-IMRT was applied at the following dose: 95% planning target volume (PTV) at 30-50 Gy/2-2.5 Gy/15-20f and 90% Boost of 45-72 Gy/3-4.5 Gy/15-20f at 5 times per week with cone beam computerized tomography validation. During and after radiotherapy, the apatinib was administrated orally with the initial dose of 500 mg per day.

RESULTS

The complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease rates were 31.6%, 36.8%, 21.1% and 10.5%, respectively. Consequently, the objective response rate and disease control rate were 68.4% and 89.5%, respectively. During a median follow-up duration of 9.0 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.0 (95% confidential interval (CI): 4.9-7.1) months with 1-year PFS rate of 42.1%; the median overall survival (OS) was not reached with 1-year OS rate of 54.6%. The safety profile was acceptable with the most common adverse events including myelosuppression (42.1%), skin reaction (36.8%), and albuminuria (26.3%).

CONCLUSION

SIB-IMRT combined with apatinib exhibits a good efficacy and tolerable safety profile, which could be considered as a potential treatment choice for uHCC patients who have deficient response to TACE.

Immunotherapy-Based Treatments of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

The advent of immunotherapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has changed the treatment landscape and conferred survival benefit for patients with advanced HCC who typically have a very poor prognosis. The most pronounced improvements in response, as documented by standardized response criteria based on CT or MRI, have been achieved when immunotherapy is combined with other systemic or locoregional therapies. Immune checkpoint inhibitor treatments result in unique patterns on CT and MRI that challenge the application of conventional response criteria such as RECIST, modified RECIST, and European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria. Thus, newer criteria have been developed to gauge therapy response or disease progression for patients on immunotherapy, including immune-related RECIST (iRECIST) and immune-modified RECIST (imRECIST), though these remain unvalidated. In this review, we describe the current landscape of immunotherapeutic agents used for HCC, summarize results of published studies, review pathobiological mechanisms that provide a rationale for the use of these agents, and report on the status of response assessment for immunotherapy, either alone or in combination with other treatment options. Finally, consensus statements are provided to inform radiologists on essential considerations in the era of a rapidly changing treatment paradigm for patients with HCC.