Comparison of Existing Response Criteria in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Transarterial Chemoembolization Using a 3D Quantitative Approach.

PURPOSE: To compare currently available non-three-dimensional methods (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST], European Association for Study of the Liver [EASL], modified RECIST [mRECIST[) with three-dimensional (3D) quantitative methods of the index tumor as early response markers in predicting patient survival after initial transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective single-institution HIPAA-compliant and institutional review board-approved study. From November 2001 to November 2008, 491 consecutive patients underwent intraarterial therapy for liver cancer with either conventional TACE or TACE with drug-eluting beads. A diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was made in 290 of these patients. The response of the index tumor on pre- and post-TACE magnetic resonance images was assessed retrospectively in 78 treatment-naïve patients with HCC (63 male; mean age, 63 years ± 11 [standard deviation]). Each response assessment method (RECIST, mRECIST, EASL, and 3D methods of volumetric RECIST [vRECIST] and quantitative EASL [qEASL]) was used to classify patients as responders or nonresponders by following standard guidelines for the uni- and bidimensional measurements and by using the formula for a sphere for the 3D measurements. The Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was performed for each method to evaluate its ability to help predict survival of responders and nonresponders. Uni- and multivariate Cox proportional hazard ratio models were used to identify covariates that had significant association with survival.

RESULTS: The uni- and bidimensional measurements of RECIST (hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.3, 1.0; P = .09), mRECIST (hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% CI: 0.6, 1.0; P = .05), and EASL (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6, 2.2; P = .75) did not show a significant difference in survival between responders and nonresponders, whereas vRECIST (hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3, 1.0; P = .04), qEASL (Vol) (hazard ratio, 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.9; P = .02), and qEASL (%) (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.60; P < .001) did show a significant difference between these groups.

CONCLUSION: The 3D-based imaging biomarkers qEASL and vRECIST were tumor response criteria that could be used to predict patient survival early after initial TACE and enabled clear identification of nonresponders.