Korean Journal of Radiology

  • 제22권3호
  • /
  • Pages.366-375
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1229-6929(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-8330(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Radiological Tumor Response Based on iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 in Metastatic Clear-Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Programmed Cell Death-1 Inhibitor Therapy

  • Bingjie Zheng (Department of Radiology, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial People's Hospital) ;
  • Ji Hoon Shin (Department of Radiology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University) ;
  • Hailiang Li (Department of Radiology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University) ;
  • Yanqiong Chen (Department of Radiology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University) ;
  • Yuan Guo (Department of Radiology, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology) ;
  • Meiyun Wang (Department of Radiology, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial People's Hospital)
  • 투고 : 2020.04.03
  • 심사 : 2020.09.17
  • 발행 : 2021.03.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: To evaluate the radiological tumor response patterns and compare the response assessments based on immune-based therapeutics Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (iRECIST) and RECIST 1.1 in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) patients treated with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors. Materials and Methods: All mccRCC patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors at Henan Cancer Hospital, China, between January 2018 and April 2019, were retrospectively studied. A total of 30 mccRCC patients (20 males and 10 females; mean age, 55.6 years; age range, 37-79 years) were analyzed. The target lesions were quantified on consecutive CT scans during therapy using iRECIST and RECIST 1.1. The tumor growth rate was calculated before and after therapy initiation. The response patterns were analyzed, and the differences in tumor response assessments of the two criteria were compared. The intra- and inter-observer variabilities of iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 were also analyzed. Results: The objective response rate throughout therapy was 50% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32.1-67.9) based on iRECIST and 30% (95% CI: 13.6-46.4) based on RECIST 1.1. The time-to-progression (TTP) based on iRECIST was longer than that based on RECIST 1.1 (median TTP: not reached vs. 170 days, p = 0.04). iRECIST and RECIST 1.1 were discordant in 8 cases, which were evaluated as immune-unconfirmed PD based on iRECIST and PD based on RECIST 1.1. Six patients (20%, 6/30) had pseudoprogression based on iRECIST, of which four demonstrated early pseudoprogression and two had delayed pseudoprogression. Significant differences in the tumor response assessments based on the two criteria were observed (p < 0.001). No patients demonstrated hyperprogression during the study period. Conclusion: Our study confirmed that the iRECIST criteria are more capable of capturing immune-related atypical responses during immunotherapy, whereas conventional RECIST 1.1 may underestimate the benefit of PD-1 inhibitors. Pseudoprogression is not rare in mccRCC patients during PD-1 inhibitor therapy, and it may last for more than the recommended maximum of 8 weeks, indicating a limitation of the current strategy for immune response monitoring.

키워드

과제정보

We thank Yafei Chen for the technical support.

참고문헌

  1. Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Kowanetz M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres J, et al. Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016;387:1837-1846  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00587-0
  2. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, McDermott DF, George S, Hammers HJ, Srinivas S, et al. Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2015;373:1803-1813  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1510665
  3. Queirolo P, Spagnolo F. Atypical responses in patients with advanced melanoma, lung cancer, renal-cell carcinoma and other solid tumors treated with anti-PD-1 drugs: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 2017;59:71-78  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.07.002
  4. Chiou VL, Burotto M. Pseudoprogression and immune-related response in solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:3541-3543  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.61.6870
  5. Raimondi A, Randon G, Sepe P, Claps M, Verzoni E, De Braud F, et al. The evaluation of response to immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: open challenges in the clinical practice. Int J Mol Sci 2019;20:4263 
  6. Wong AS, Thian YL, Kapur J, Leong CN, Kee P, Lee CT, et al. Pushing the limits of immune-related response: a case of "extreme pseudoprogression". Cancer Immunol Immunother 2018;67:1105-1111  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-018-2167-3
  7. Champiat S, Dercle L, Ammari S, Massard C, Hollebecque A, Postel-Vinay S, et al. Hyperprogressive disease is a new pattern of progression in cancer patients treated by anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:1920-1928  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1741
  8. Soria F, Beleni AI, D'Andrea D, Resch I, Gust KM, Gontero P, et al. Pseudoprogression and hyperprogression during immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for urothelial and kidney cancer. World J Urol 2018;36:1703-1709  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2264-0
  9. Carter BW, Bhosale PR, Yang WT. Immunotherapy and the role of imaging. Cancer 2018;124:2906-2922  https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.31349
  10. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
  11. Nishino M, Ramaiya NH, Chambers ES, Adeni AE, Hatabu H, Janne PA, et al. Immune-related response assessment during PD-1 inhibitor therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. J Immunother Cancer 2016;4:84 
  12. Kim HK, Heo MH, Lee HS, Sun JM, Lee SH, Ahn JS, et al. Comparison of RECIST to immune-related response criteria in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2017;80:591-598  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-017-3396-4
  13. Khoja L, Kibiro M, Metser U, Gedye C, Hogg D, Butler MO, et al. Patterns of response to anti-PD-1 treatment: an exploratory comparison of four radiological response criteria and associations with overall survival in metastatic melanoma patients. Br J Cancer 2016;115:1186-1192  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.308
  14. Tazdait M, Mezquita L, Lahmar J, Ferrara R, Bidault F, Ammari S, et al. Patterns of responses in metastatic NSCLC during PD-1 or PDL-1 inhibitor therapy: comparison of RECIST 1.1, irRECIST and iRECIST criteria. Eur J Cancer 2018;88:38-47  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.017
  15. Bohnsack O, Hoos A, Ludajic K. Adaptation of the immune related response criteria: irRECIST. Ann Oncol 2014;25:iv369 
  16. Nishino M, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gargano M, Suda M, Ramaiya NH, Hodi FS. Developing a common language for tumor response to immunotherapy: immune-related response criteria using unidimensional measurements. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:3936-3943  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0895
  17. Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O'Day S, Weber JS, Hamid O, Lebbe C, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:7412-7420  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1624
  18. Wei H, Jiang H, Song B. Role of medical imaging for immune checkpoint blockade therapy: from response assessment to prognosis prediction. Cancer Med 2019;8:5399-5413  https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2464
  19. Thallinger C, Fureder T, Preusser M, Heller G, Mullauer L, Holler C, et al. Review of cancer treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors: current concepts, expectations, limitations and pitfalls. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2018;130:85-91  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-017-1285-9
  20. Nishino M, Hatabu H, Hodi FS. Imaging of cancer immunotherapy: current approaches and future directions. Radiology 2018;290:9-22  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181349
  21. Seymour L, Bogaerts J, Perrone A, Ford R, Schwartz LH, Mandrekar S, et al. iRECIST: guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics. Lancet Oncol 2017;18:e143-e152  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30074-8
  22. Ferte C, Fernandez M, Hollebecque A, Koscielny S, Levy A, Massard C, et al. Tumor growth rate is an early indicator of antitumor drug activity in phase I clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2014;20:246-252  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2098
  23. Gomez-Roca C, Koscielny S, Ribrag V, Dromain C, Marzouk I, Bidault F, et al. Tumour growth rates and RECIST criteria in early drug development. Eur J Cancer 2011;47:2512-2516  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.06.012
  24. Ferrara R, Mezquita L, Texier M, Lahmar J, Audigier-Valette C, Tessonnier L, et al. Hyperprogressive disease in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors or with single-agent chemotherapy. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:1543-1552  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.3676
  25. Hodi FS, Hwu WJ, Kefford R, Weber JS, Daud A, Hamid O, et al. Evaluation of immune-related response criteria and RECIST v1.1 in patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:1510-1517  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.64.0391
  26. Champiat S, Ferrara R, Massard C, Besse B, Marabelle A, Soria JC, et al. Hyperprogressive disease: recognizing a novel pattern to improve patient management. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2018;15:748-762  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-018-0111-2
  27. Ko JJ, Xie W, Kroeger N, Lee JL, Rini BI, Knox JJ, et al. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model as a prognostic tool in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma previously treated with first-line targeted therapy: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:293-300  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71222-7
  28. Nishino M, Giobbie-Hurder A, Manos MP, Bailey N, Buchbinder EI, Ott PA, et al. Immune-related tumor response dynamics in melanoma patients treated with pembrolizumab: identifying markers for clinical outcome and treatment decisions. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:4671-4679  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0114
  29. Katz SI, Hammer M, Bagley SJ, Aggarwal C, Bauml JM, Thompson JC, et al. Radiologic pseudoprogression during anti-PD-1 therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2018;13:978-986  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2018.04.010
  30. Nishino M, Dahlberg SE, Adeni AE, Lydon CA, Hatabu H, Janne PA, et al. Tumor response dynamics of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors: imaging markers for treatment outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:5737-5744  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-1434
  31. Gettinger SN, Horn L, Gandhi L, Spigel DR, Antonia SJ, Rizvi NA, et al. Overall survival and long-term safety of nivolumab (anti-programmed death 1 antibody, BMS-936558, ONO-4538) in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:2004-2012  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.58.3708
  32. Escudier B, Motzer RJ, Sharma P, Wagstaff J, Plimack ER, Hammers HJ, et al. Treatment beyond progression in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab in CheckMate 025. Eur Urol 2017;72:368-376 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.037