L. Ollivier

PURPOSE: We evaluated the impact of an evaluation committee (EC) on patients' overall response status in a large multicenter trial in oncology. We identified reasons for disagreements between investigators and the EC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Cancer Renal Cytokine (CRECY) study was a French multicenter trial that tested cytokine therapy in 489 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Objective response (OR) evaluation included medical imaging and was studied according to international guidelines. A blinded peer review of all responders and litigious cases was performed by an EC. RESULTS: Major disagreements occurred in 40% and minor disagreements in 10.5% of the reviewed files. The number of significant tumor responses was reduced by 23.2% after review by the EC. Reasons for disagreements included errors in tumor measurements, errors in selection of measurable targets, intercurrent diseases, and radiologic technical problems. These reasons for disagreements are analyzed and discussed. CONCLUSION: We conclude that all therapeutic trial results should be reviewed by peer analysis of all presumed responders by an EC. International guidelines for response evaluation should be updated by including more reliable methods of measurements and definition of minimal imaging procedures.

New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors using imaging techniques have major limitations and important implications for radiological workload. This consensus statement from the International Cancer Imaging Society (ICIS) reviews the RECIST criteria and addresses several challenges regarding tumour measurement. Recommendations are made regarding tumour measurement and other issues are raised. The growing need to introduce a multimodality approach to monitoring response is recognized. ICIS welcomes a dialogue with the authors of RECIST to address issues raised in this review.

BACKGROUND: Treatment effect is categorised into four classes by RECIST based on the evolution of the size of target lesions and the occurrence of new lesions, irrespective of tumour growth kinetics before treatment. This study aimed at evaluating the added value of tumour growth kinetics assessment to RECIST in patients treated with molecularly targeted agents (MTAs). METHODS: On-study imaging, along with pre-baseline imaging, of patients treated with MTA(s) in clinical trials at Institut Curie were centrally reviewed. The tumour growth ratio (TGr), defined as the ratio of the slope of tumour growth before treatment and the slope of tumour growth on treatment between the nadir and disease progression, was calculated for each patient. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients included in 18 trials were eligible for the study. Among the 44 patients who withdrew from the study because of disease progression according to the investigators' assessment, 18 patients (41%) had a TGr <0.9. Among these 18 patients, 5 had disease progression according to RECIST 1.1 based on our retrospective reassessment of on-study imaging and occurrence of no new lesion during study treatment. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results suggest that a substantial proportion of patients treated with MTAs have discontinued treatment although being potentially benefitted from them.

OBJECTIVE: To improve patient management based on analysis of the results of a survey conducted during their visit to the imaging department of a cancer centre. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire comprising 30 single-response questions on a dichotomous scale or a 3- or 4-modality scale was developed by three radiologists specialized in oncology, the head of our quality assurance department, a psycho-oncologist, a psycho-sociologist, a biostatistician and a member of our institute's Patient Committee. Questions concerned reception, information provided about the examinations, examination experiences, the relational qualities and availability of health care professionals, the interview with the radiologist and announcement of the examination results. RESULTS: The questionnaire was given to 190 patients in the waiting room before a standard radiography or ultrasound examination (33%), mammography and breast ultrasound (33%), computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (34%). The return rate was 81%. This article analyses the responses to the various questions in terms of either percentages or detailed replies and suggestions. CONCLUSION: Analysis of the patients' experience and their suggestions provided objective elements concerning their real wishes in relation to each step of their management and identified changes and improvements to be made to the organization and daily functioning of the department.