Comparison of linear and volumetric criteria in assessing tumor response in adult high-grade gliomas

摘要

The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, or RECIST criteria (one-dimensional [1D] measurement), are widely used to measure response in tumors, but there are few studies evaluating these criteria in brain tumors. We compared linear and volumetric measurements in adult high-grade supratentorial enhancing gliomas to determine the agreement between measurements, in defining responses and in their subsequent relation to survival. We hypothesized that the 1D RECIST criteria maybe suitable for response assessment in adult high-grade gliomas. Tumor size on MRI scans in 104 patients with high-grade enhancing gliomas treated on clini- cal trial protocols was measured by using 1D (greatest length), 2D (two-dimensional: product of the two longest perpendicular diameters), 3D (three dimensional: product of the longest perpendicular diameters in one plane and the longest orthogonal diameter to that plane), enhancing volume (EV), and total volume (TV). A total of 388 T1 postgadolinium MRI scans (104 baseline and 284 follow-up scans) were evaluated. Volumetric analysis (EV and TV) was performed with commercially available software. Intraobserver and interobserver correlations (ρ) were high for all modalities (ρ > 0.92 and ρ > 0.71, respectively). Correlation was excellent (ρ > 0.9) among all modalities except for 3D (ρ < 0.6). Patient response rates ranged from 12% to 26%. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and six-month progression-free survival (6mPFS) were not significantly different among the methods (range, 5.3 months to 5.9 months and 42% to 48%, respectively). Landmark analyses of response at two months using linear methods predicted overall survival with hazard ratios of 0.19 to 0.29 (P < 0.005). These results suggest high concordance among 1D, 2D, TV, and EV, but not 3D, methods in assessing enhancing tumor progression and in estimating mPFS and 6mPFS in adult brain tumor patients. The tumor response at two months assessed by linear methods correlated better with overall survival. Thus, linear methods are comparable to volumetric methods, but simpler to implement for routine clinical use and for designing clinical trials of brain tumors.