1 / 37

RESPONSE EVALUATION OF MESOTHELIOMA THERAPY

RESPONSE EVALUATION OF MESOTHELIOMA THERAPY. Dr. Muzaffer Metintaş Eskişehir Osmangazi University Medical Faculty Department of Chest Diseases metintas@superonline.com April 2007. We want to measure tumor response:.

channing-melendez
Download Presentation

RESPONSE EVALUATION OF MESOTHELIOMA THERAPY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RESPONSE EVALUATION OF MESOTHELIOMA THERAPY Dr. Muzaffer Metintaş Eskişehir Osmangazi University Medical Faculty Department of Chest Diseases metintas@superonline.com April 2007

  2. We want to measure tumor response: Objective tumor response is a pirimary end-point in phase II clinical trials to evaluate anti-cancer drugs. The use of objective response allows active drugs to be fast tracked, and inactive drugs to be discarded early within a short-time frame, with fewer patient numbers than required phase III trials.Determination of response is very important to be able to compare different studies! Park JO. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2003; 33: 533.Nowak AK. Lung Cancer 2005; 49S1: S37.

  3. How can you objectively measure responses: 1. WHO criteria; two - dimension, 2. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors -RECIST criteria, one – dimension. Miller AB. Cancer 1981; 47: 207.James K. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 523.Therasse P. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205.

  4. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria If the disease could be measured bidimensionally, it was accepted as ‘measurable disease’, If the tumor size could not be clearly defined, it was accepted as ‘evaluable disease’. ? M. Metintaş Archive

  5. Baseline Visit 4 Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria Complete response: Defined as complete disappearance of all measurable or evaluable lesions, as well as the absence of signs and symptoms for longer than 4 weeks without relapse of lesions.

  6. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria Partial response Regression Defined as a decrease in the sum of the products of perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions greater than 50 % compared with pre-treatment measurements, and no relapse of lesions over a period of four weeks. Defined as an assured decrease in tumor size for lesions not bidimensionally measurable, agreed on by two independent investigators, and no relapse of lesions over a period exceeding 8 weeks. M. Metintaş Archive

  7. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria Stable diseases for measurable Stable diseases for evaluable Defined as less than 50 % reduction or less than 25 % increase in the sum of the products of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable lesions in relation to the size at entry, over a period exceeding 8 weeks, with no relapse of lesions. Defined as the absence of clear-cut change in an assessable tumor size and the absence of new lesions over a period exceeding 8 weeks, with no relapse of lesions.

  8. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria Progressive diseases Defined for measurable disease as an increase in the sum of product of two perpendicular diameters of all measured lesions by more than 25 % over the initial tumor size at entry, and for evaluable disease as an assured increase in the tumor size.

  9. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Six different patients M. Metintaş Archive

  10. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria Measuring in two dimensions and then calculating their products and their sums is laboraious and has the risk of error. Park JO. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2003; 33: 533. In theory, the changes in diameter relate more closely to the fixed proportion of cells killed by a standart dose of chemotherapy than do changes in the bidimensional product. Therasse P. Cancer 2002; 38: 1817. The use of WHO criteria is poorly reproducible between one investigator, or group of investigators, and another. Therasse P. Cancer 2002; 38: 1817.

  11. Response evaluation in mesothelioma WHO criteria The previously widely-used WHO tumor response criteria were poorly suited to the growth pattern of pleural mesothelioma. . As a rind around the hemithorax, . Multiple thoracic levels may be involved, . Separete nodules / pleural thickening, . Fissural involvement, . With atelectasies, pleural fluid, fibrosis.

  12. Response evaluation in mesothelioma RECIST criteria Response (R) Evaluation (E) Criteria (C) in (I) Solid (S) Tumors (T) RECIST criteria has been suggested for all solid tumors. • Measurable lesions in at least one dimension: Longest diameter (LD) • Must be at least 20 mm conventional X-ray, 10 mm CT scan • Target lesions: up to 5 per organ, up to 10 total. Therasse P. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205.

  13. Response evaluation in mesothelioma RECIST criteria Response evaluation • CR = Complete response = disappearance of all target lesions (and all non-target ones) • PR = Partial Response = at least 30% decrease in the Sum LD • PD = Progressive Disease = at least 20% increasein the Sum LD or occurrence of new lesions orobvious progression of non-target lesions • SD = Stable disease = all else. Therasse P. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205.

  14. Response evaluation in mesothelioma RECIST criteria ? ? M. Metintaş Archive

  15. Response evaluation in mesothelioma RECIST criteria Despite simple use, application of the RECIST criteria is not simple in pleural mesothelioma: Which one is the longest diameter ? Outer extension of hemithorax can change measurements falsely in responsive patients,or The rich fibrous tissue in the tumour will shrink = hemithorax will get smaller = LD will DECREASE in size! Change in fixed structers may prevent true estimation of diameter. Novak AK. Lung Cancer 2005; 49S1: S37.van Klaveren RJ. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 63.

  16. Response evaluation in mesothelioma RECIST criteria Authors determined that the agreement between WHO and RECIST response evaluation is poor and that RECIST in the majority of the cases underscores the tumor response. Monetti F. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 71.van Klaveren RJ. Lung Cancer 2004; 43: 63.

  17. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria Byrne MJ. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 257.

  18. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria • Tumor thickness perpendicular to the chest wall or mediastinum, • Two seperate positions at three seperate levels on thoracic CT scan, • Sum of six = pleural unidimensional measure. M. Metintaş Archive

  19. M. Metintaş Archive ? ?

  20. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria In 73 patients, response according to modified RECIST criteria predicted for superior survival in responders than non-responders (15.1 versus 8.9 months; p=0.03) and a signficiant correlation between change in linear tumor measurement and FVC was seen (R=0.63, p=0.0001). Byrne MJ. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 257.

  21. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria ? ? ? M. Metintaş Archive

  22. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria M. Metintaş Archive

  23. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria M. Metintaş Archive

  24. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria M. Metintaş Archive

  25. M. Metintaş Archive

  26. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Modified RECIST criteria M. Metintaş Archive

  27. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Mesothelioma M. Metintaş Archive

  28. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Mesothelioma M. Metintaş Archive

  29. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to saphere ?

  30. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to saphere ? Can we use the Cavallieri volumetric estimation method ?

  31. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Volumetric method Volume (mm3) = t x a2 x ∑Pi t: Distance between two scans (mm) a2: Area for each point on the grid Pi: Total amount of points on each scan

  32. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Volumetric method

  33. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to sphere ? THREE DIMENSIONAL EVALUATION OF CHEMOTHERAPY RESPONSE IN MALIGN PLEURAL MESOTHELIOMA Guntulu Ak1, Muzaffer Metintas1, Selma Metintas2, Ragip Ozkan3, Hilmi Ozden4 Osmangazi University Medical Faculty, Department of Chest Diseases1, Public Health2, Radiology3, Anatomy4, Eskisehir, TURKEY Ak G. TTS 10. Annual Meeting, Antalya, April 2007

  34. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to sphere ? Ak G. TTS 10. Annual Meeting, Antalya, April 2007

  35. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to sphere ? Ak G. TTS 10. Annual Meeting, Antalya, April 2007

  36. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Can we change the undefinable shapes to sphere ? Ak G. TTS 10. Annual Meeting, Antalya, April 2007

  37. Response evaluation in mesothelioma Future directions Therapy response evaluation in malignant pleural mesothelioma with integrated PET-CT imaging. • Ceresoli GL. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4587. Evaluation of semi-automated measurements of mesothelioma tumor thickness on CT scans. Armato III SG. Acad Radiol 2005; 12: 1301.

More Related