BACKGROUND/AIM: To evaluate the prognostic value of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), modified RECIST and volumetric analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated by transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center prospective cohort study included a total of 61 patients with HCC treated by transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). The response of TACE was evaluated on preprocedural and postprocedural CT by two radiologists using RECIST/mRECIST and volumetric response to treatment. Each response assessment method was used to classify the response as progressive disease, stable disease, partial response and complete response. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test was performed for each method to evaluate its ability to help predict overall survival and progression free survival. Interobserver variability and reproducibility was determined by the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 17.1 months and the median progression-free survival was 11.1 months. Volumetric assessment was proved to be a prognostic factor for overall survival (p<0.01) and progression-free survival (p<0.001), contrasting with RECIST and mRECIST. All three methods featured very small interobserver variability (p<0.001 for Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients). The patients classified as having stable disease had a 3.8-fold higher risk of death than the patients classified as having a complete/partial response (HR=3.82; 95% Confidence Interval (CI)=1.32-11.02; p=0.013) and a 4.5-fold higher risk of progression (HR=4.46; 95% CI=1.72-11.61; p=0.002). CONCLUSION: The prognostic value of volumetric analysis in patients with HCC treated by TACE appears to be superior to RECIST and mRECIST, with a real impact in everyday practice.

Clinic of Comprehensive Cancer Care Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute Brno Czech Republic

Department of Hematooncology University Hospital Brno Brno Czech Republic

Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine University Hospital Brno and Department of Biophysics Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic;

Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Llovet JM, Burroughs A, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2003;362(9399):1907–1917. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14964-1. PubMed DOI

Altekruse SF, McGlynn KA, Reichman ME. Hepatocellular carcinoma incidence, mortality, and survival trends in the United States from 1975 to 2005. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(9):1485–1491. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.7753. PubMed DOI PMC

Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63(1):11–30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21166. PubMed DOI

Forner A, Reig ME, de Lope CR, Bruix J. Current strategy for staging and treatment: the BCLC update and future prospects. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30(1):61–74. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1247133. PubMed DOI

European Association For The Study Of The Liver , European Organisation For Research And Treatment Of Cancer EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2012;56(4):908–943. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.001. PubMed DOI

Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30(1):52–60. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1247132. PubMed DOI

Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, Van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(3):205–216. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205. PubMed DOI

Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubinstein L, Shankar L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–247. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. PubMed DOI

Forner A, Ayuso C, Varela M, Rimola J, Hessheimer AJ, de Lope CR, Reig M, Bianchi L, Llovet JM, Bruix J. Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: are response evaluation criteria in solid tumors reliable. Cancer. 2009;115(3):616–623. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24050. PubMed DOI

Corona-Villalobos CP, Halappa VG, Geschwind JF, Bonekamp S, Reyes D, Cosgrove D, Pawlik TM, Kamel IR. Volumetric assessment of tumour response using functional MR imaging in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with a combination of doxorubicin-eluting beads and sorafenib. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(2):380–390. doi: 10.1007/s00330-014-3412-6. PubMed DOI PMC

Sacco R, Mismas V, Marceglia S, Romano A, Giacomelli L, Bertini M, Federici G, Metrangolo S, Parisi G, Tumino E, Bresci G, Corti A, Tredici M, Piccinno M, Giorgi L, Bartolozzi C, Bargellini I. Transarterial radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: An update and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(21):6518–6525. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i21.6518. PubMed DOI PMC

Bargellini I, Scionti A, Mismas V, Masi G, Vivaldi C, Bartolozzi C, Sacco R. Identification of responders to sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma: is tumor volume measurement the way forward. Oncology. 2014;86(4):191–198. doi: 10.1159/000358599. PubMed DOI

Hayano K, Fuentes-Orrego JM, Sahani DV. New approaches for precise response evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(12):3059–3068. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i12.3059. PubMed DOI PMC

Jiang HY, Chen J, Xia CC, Cao LK, Duan T, Song B. Noninvasive imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: From diagnosis to prognosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(22):2348–2362. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i22.2348. PubMed DOI PMC

Bonekamp D, Bonekamp S, Halappa VG, Geschwind JF, Eng J, Corona-Villalobos CP, Pawlik TM, Kamel IR. Interobserver agreement of semi-automated and manual measurements of functional MRI metrics of treatment response in hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(3):487–496. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.11.016. PubMed DOI PMC

Galizia MS, Töre HG, Chalian H, McCarthy R, Salem R, Yaghmai V. MDCT necrosis quantification in the assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma response to yttrium 90 radioembolization therapy: comparison of two-dimensional and volumetric techniques. Acad Radiol. 2012;19(1):48–54. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2011.09.005. PubMed DOI

Bargellini I, Bozzi E, Campani D, Carrai P, De Simone P, Pollina L, Cioni R, Filipponi F, Bartolozzi C. Modified RECIST to assess tumor response after transarterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma: CT-pathologic correlation in 178 liver explants. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(5):e212–e218. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.12.009. PubMed DOI

Meng XC, Chen BH, Huang JJ, Huang WS, Cai MY, Zhou JW, Guo YJ, Zhu KS. Early prediction of survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization plus sorafenib. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(4):484–493. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i4.484. PubMed DOI PMC

Vincenzi B, Di Maio M, Silletta M, D’Onofrio L, Spoto C, Piccirillo MC, Daniele G, Comito F, Maci E, Bronte G, Russo A, Santini D, Perrone F, Tonini G. Prognostic relevance of objective response according to EASL criteria and mRECIST criteria in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with loco-regional therapies: a literature-based meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(7):e0133488. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133488. PubMed DOI PMC

Ronot M, Bouattour M, Wassermann J, Bruno O, Dreyer C, Larroque B, Castera L, Vilgrain V, Belghiti J, Raymond E, Faivre S. Alternative Response Criteria (Choi, European association for the study of the liver, and modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST]) Versus RECIST 1.1 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib. Oncologist. 2014;19(4):394–402. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0114. PubMed DOI PMC

Chapiro J, Duran R, Lin M, Schernthaner RE, Wang Z, Gorodetski B, Geschwind JF. Identifying staging markers for hepatocellular carcinoma before transarterial chemoembolization: Comparison of three-dimensional quantitative versus non-three-dimensional imaging markers. Radiology. 2015;275(2):438–447. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14141180. PubMed DOI PMC

Xing M, Kokabi N, Prajapati HJ, Close O, Ludwig JM, Kim HS. Survival in unresectable AJCC stage I and II HCC and the effect of DEB-TACE: SEER versus tertiary cancer center cohort study. J Comp Eff Res. 2016;5(2):141–154. doi: 10.2217/cer.15.54. PubMed DOI

Tacher V, Lin M, Duran R, Yarmohammadi H, Lee H, Chapiro J, Chao M, Wang Z, Frangakis C, Sohn JH, Maltenfort MG, Pawlik T, Geschwind JF. Comparison of existing response criteria in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with transarterial chemoembolization using a 3D quantitative approach. Radiology. 2016;278(1):275–284. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015142951. PubMed DOI PMC

Colombo M, Sangiovanni A. Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: beyond international guidelines. Liver Int. 2015;35 Suppl 1:129–138. doi: 10.1111/liv.12713. PubMed DOI

Massarweh NN, Davila JA, El-Serag HB, Duan Z, Temple S, May S, Sada YH, Anaya DA. Transarterial bland versus chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: rethinking a gold standard. J Surg Res. 2016;200(2):552–559. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.09.034. PubMed DOI

Planz VB, Lubner MG, Pickhardt PJ. Volumetric analysis at abdominal CT: oncologic and non-oncologic applications. Br J Radiol. 2019;92(1095):20180631. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20180631. PubMed DOI PMC

Schiavon G, Ruggiero A, Schöffski P, van der Holt B, Bekers DJ, Eechoute K, Vandecaveye V, Krestin GP, Verweij J, Sleijfer S, Mathijssen RH. Tumor volume as an alternative response measurement for imatinib treated GIST patients. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48372. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048372. PubMed DOI PMC