Limitations with the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) guidance in disseminated pediatric malignancy
- 1 January 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Pediatric Blood & Cancer
- Vol. 46 (2) , 127-134
- https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.20344
Abstract
Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) guidelines were published in 2000 to evaluate response to treatment in solid tumors. These have sought to unify response assessment, and the new guidelines extend beyond lesion assessment to address modern imaging strategies. The RECIST guidelines, however, become complex and problematic when used to evaluate metastatic disease. Ten consecutive oncology cases representative of tumors common to our pediatric practice were selected. All cases were evaluated at initial presentation and follow-up. The RECIST criteria were retrospectively applied in each case. A standardized evaluation form was used. The age range of the patients included in the study was 1 month to 16 years, with a mean age of 3.9 years. A range of tumor responses was identified: partial response (n = 6), stable disease (n = 2), and progressive disease (n = 2). Two of these responses were likely incorrect. Tumor bulk was underestimated in the axial plane, many lesions were either calcified and unmeasurable, or despite being well-defined were too small to be measurable under the strict RECIST guidance. In highlighting specific problems with disseminated pediatric tumors, we emphasize the pressing need for debate regarding the application of RECIST in pediatric oncology and encourage the development of a pediatric radiology oncology group to collaborate in future modifications of the RECIST guidance.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluation of the response to treatment of solid tumours – a consensus statement of the International Cancer Imaging SocietyBritish Journal of Cancer, 2004
- Can paediatric radiologists resist RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours)?Pediatric Radiology, 2003
- The RECIST criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologistsThe British Journal of Radiology, 2001
- CT assessment of tumour response to treatment: comparison of linear, cross-sectional and volumetric measures of tumour size.The British Journal of Radiology, 2000
- Commentary. Are current tumour response criteria relevant for the 21st century?The British Journal of Radiology, 2000
- New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid TumorsJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2000
- Re: Measure once or twice--does it really matter?JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1999
- Measuring Response in Solid Tumors: Unidimensional Versus Bidimensional MeasurementJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1999
- Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging.Radiology, 1994
- Reporting results of cancer treatmentCancer, 1981