Comparison of the RECIST and EORTC PET criteria in the tumor response assessment: a pooled analysis and review.

PURPOSE: The EORTC PET criteria (EORTC criteria) are used to assess metabolic tumor response in patients with solid tumors. We conducted this pooled study to compare tumor responses according to the RECIST and EORTC criteria. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for eligible articles with the terms of "RECIST" or "EORTC criteria". We found seven articles with the data on the comparison of tumor responses by the RECIST and EORTC criteria. RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were recruited from the seven studies. Ninety-two patients (50.8%) received cytotoxic chemotherapy and 89 were treated with targeted agents. The agreement of tumor responses between the RECIST and EORTC criteria was moderate (k = 0.493). Of 181 patients, 66 (36.5%) showed disagreement in the tumor responses: tumor response was upgraded in 54 patients and downgraded in 12 when adopting the EORTC criteria. The estimated overall response rates were significantly different between the two criteria (52.5% by the EORTC vs. 29.8% by the RECIST, P < 0.0001). When comparing the two criteria according to the anti-cancer treatments (chemotherapy or targeted therapy), the levels of agreement in tumor responses were not excellent (k = 0.461 for chemotherapy and k = 0.524 for targeted therapy, respectively) regardless of therapeutic types. CONCLUSION: This pooled study indicates that the concordance of tumor responses between the RECIST and EORTC criteria is not excellent. When adopting the EORTC criteria instead of the RECIST, the overall response rate was significantly increased.

Tumor response assessment by the single-lesion measurement per organ in small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The criterion of two target lesions per organ in the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 is an arbitrary one, being supported by no objective evidence. The optimal number of target lesions per organ still needs to be investigated. We compared tumor responses using the RECIST 1.1 (measuring two target lesions per organ) and modified RECIST 1.1 (measuring the single largest lesion in each organ) in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: We reviewed medical records of patients with SCLC who received first-line treatment between January 2004 and December 2014 and compared tumor responses according to the two criteria using computed tomography. RESULTS: There were a total of 34 patients who had at least two target lesions in any organ according to the RECIST 1.1 during the study period. The differences in the percentage changes of the sum of tumor measurements between RECIST 1.1 and modified RECIST 1.1 were all within 13%. Seven patients showed complete response and fourteen showed partial response according to the RECIST 1.1. The overall response rate was 61.8%. When assessing with the modified RECIST 1.1 instead of the RECIST 1.1, tumor responses showed perfect concordance between the two criteria (k=1.0). CONCLUSIONS: The modified RECIST 1.1 showed perfect agreement with the original RECIST 1.1 in the assessment of tumor response of SCLC. Our result suggests that it may be enough to measure the single largest target lesion per organ for evaluating tumor response.

Measuring the Environmental Burden of Disease in South Korea: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: This study attempted to measure the environmental burden of disease by examining mortality and disability rates in South Korea, permitting international comparisons. METHODS: Disability-adjusted life years (DALY) was used to analyze data from public records. Years of life lost (YLL) and years lost to disability (YLD) were measured in terms of incidence rate and number of deaths. Attributable risks were based on those for WHO Western Pacific Regions. For air pollution, attributable risk was calculated using local PM10 levels and relative risk. RESULTS: The total Korean environmental burden of disease was 17.98 per 1000 persons and the most serious risk factor was air pollution, at 6.89 per 1000 persons. Occupation was the second highest contributing factor, at 3.29 per 1000 persons, followed by indoor air pollution at 2.91 per 1000 persons. The DALY of air-pollution (indoor and outdoor) was 9.80 per 1000 persons, accounting for more than half of the total environmental burden of disease. The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, and asthma were 4.07, 3.16, and 1.96 per 1000 persons, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory illnesses comprised most of the disease burden, the majority of which was linked to air pollution. The present results are important as they could be used to make evidence-based decisions regarding the management of diseases and environmental-risk factors.

The assessment of tumor response by measuring the single largest lesion per organ in metastatic tumors: a pooled analysis of previously reported data.

BACKGROUND: The RECIST 1.1 adopted a total of five target lesions to be measured, with a maximum of two lesions per organ. To the best of our knowledge, the criterion of two target lesions per organ in the RECIST 1.1 is arbitrary and has not been supported by any objective evidence. Recently, we reported that the modified RECIST 1.1 (measuring the single largest lesion in each organ) showed a high level of concordance with the original RECIST 1.1 in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), gastric cancer (GC), and colorectal cancer (CRC). However, each study had a major limitation of a small number of patients. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis using the data from the three individual studies to improve statistical power. Tumor responses were compared according to the RECIST 1.1 and modified RECIST 1.1 (mRECIST 1.1). RESULTS: A total of 153 patients who had at least two target lesions in any organ according to the RECIST 1.1 were included in this pooled study: 64 with NSCLC, 51 with GC, and 38 with CRC. Regardless of primary sites, the number of target lesions according to the mRECIST 1.1 was significantly lower than that according to the RECIST 1.1 (P<0.001). The assessment of tumor responses showed a high concordance between the two criteria (k = 0.908). Only eight patients (5.2%) showed disagreement in the tumor response assessment between the two criteria. The overall response rates of chemotherapy were not significantly different between the two criteria (33.3% versus 33.3%, P=1.0). CONCLUSIONS: The modified RECIST 1.1 was comparable to the original RECIST 1.1 in the tumor response assessment of patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, GC, and CRC. Our results suggest that it may be possible to measure the single largest lesion per organ for assessing tumor response in clinical practice.

Tumor response assessment by measuring the single largest lesion per organ in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The criterion of two target lesions per organ in the RECIST 1.1 is an arbitrary one, not being supported by any objective evidence. We compared tumor responses, respectively, using the RECIST 1.1 (measuring two target lesions per organ) and modified RECIST 1.1 (measuring the single largest lesion in each organ) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed medical records of patients with advanced NSCLC who received a first-line chemotherapy between January 2004 and December 2013 and compared tumor responses according to the two criteria using computed tomography. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients who had at least two target lesions in any organ according to the RECIST 1.1 were included in the study. The differences in the percentage changes of the sum of tumor measurements between the RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST 1.1 were all within 10%. Thirty-three patients (51.6%) showed an increase in the absolute value of the percentage change when adopting the mRECIST 1.1, instead of the RECIST 1.1. The tumor responses showed high concordance between the two criteria (k=0.899). Only three patients (4.7%) showed disagreement of the responses between the RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST 1.1. The overall response rates (20.3% vs. 20.3%) and disease control rates (89.1% vs. 90.6%) of first-line chemotherapy were not significantly different between the two criteria. CONCLUSION: The modified RECIST 1.1 was comparable to the original RECIST 1.1 in the response assessment of patients with advanced NSCLC. Our result suggests that it may be possible to measure the single largest target lesion per organ for evaluation of the best tumor response.

Comparison of RECIST version 1.0 and 1.1 in assessment of tumor response by computed tomography in advanced gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guideline version 1.0 (RECIST 1.0) was proposed as a new guideline for evaluating tumor response and has been widely accepted as a standardized measure. With a number of issues being raised on RECIST 1.0, however, a revised RECIST guideline version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) was proposed by the RECIST Working Group in 2009. This study was conducted to compare CT tumor response based on RECIST 1.1 vs. RECIST 1.0 in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). METHODS: We reviewed 61 AGC patients with measurable diseases by RECIST 1.0 who were enrolled in other clinical trials between 2008 and 2010. These patients were retrospectively re-analyzed to determine the concordance between the two response criteria using the κ statistic. RESULTS: The number and sum of tumor diameters of the target lesions by RECIST 1.1 were significantly lower than those by RECIST 1.0 (P<0.0001). However, there was excellent agreement in tumor response between RECIST 1.1 and RECIST 1.0 (κ=0.844). The overall response rates (ORRs) according to RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1 were 32.7% (20/61) and 34.5% (20/58), respectively. One patient with partial response (PR) based on RECIST 1.0 was reclassified as stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1. Of two patients with SD by RECIST 1.0, one was downgraded to progressive disease and the other was upgraded to PR by RECIST 1.1. CONCLUSIONS: RECIST 1.1 provided almost perfect agreement with RECIST 1.0 in the CT assessment of tumor response of AGC.

Treatment duration and cost of work-related low back pain in Korea.

The purpose of this study is to present the information on the duration of treatment and the cost of work-related low back pain. Using the compensation-database for 1997 work-related low back pain (n=9,277), this study estimated the duration of treatment, the cost of work-related low back pain, the relationship between them, and probability of being off treatment at different intervals. The mean and the median of the treatment duration are 252.6 days and 175 days. The mean and the median of the cost of total insurance benefit are 37,700,000 won and 14,400,000 won. The treatment duration of 51% of the study subjects was less than 6 months and their cost accounted for 10.2% of the total insurance benefit. The subjects who were treated more than 24 months were 5.8% but it accounted for 29.2% of the cost. It was found that approximately 50% of the subjects who will remain on treatment at the end of n months would be off treatment at the end of n+5 months. This study presents the point in time when the low back pain (LBP) workers need to prepare to return to work by forecasting their off-treatment period. From the treat duration and cost perspectives, this study may be utilized as evidence for active management of work-related LBP.

Industrial accident compensation insurance benefits on cerebrovascular and heart disease in Korea.

The purpose of this study is to present the importance of work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease from the viewpoint of expenses. Using the insurance benefit paid for the 4,300 cases, this study estimated the burden of insurance benefits spent on work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease. The number of cases with work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease per 100,000 insured workers were 3.36 in 1995; they were increased to 13.16 in 2000. By the days of occurrence, the estimated number of cases were 1,336 in 2001 (95% CI: 1,211-1,460 cases) and 1,769 in 2005 (CI: 1,610-1,931 cases). The estimated average insurance benefits paid per person with work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease was 75-19 million won for medical care benefit and 56 million won for other benefits except medical care. By considering the increase in insurance payment and average pay, the predicted insurance benefits for work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease was 107.9 billion won for the 2001 cohort and 192.4 billion won for the 2005 cohort. From an economic perspective, the results will be used as important evidence for the prevention and management of work-related cerebrovascular and heart disease.