Comparison of computed tomography imaging analyses for evaluation after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective pooled analysis of six phase II clinical trials

Kosuke Hirose, Eiji Oki, Takayuki Shimose, Sanae Sakamoto, Shun Sasaki, Tomoko Jogo, Qingjiang Hu, Yasuo Tsuda, Koji Ando, Yuichiro Nakashima, Hiroshi Saeki, Masaki Mori

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: There are several methods for analyzing computed tomography (CT) images to evaluate chemotherapy efficacy in clinical studies. However, the optimal analysis method for each drug is still under debate. We conducted a pooled analysis using data from six phase II studies to evaluate four analysis methods in colorectal cancers (CRCs): morphological responses (MRs), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) ver.1.1. Methods: We included 249 patients in this analysis. Pretreatments and findings of subsequent CT imaging were analyzed based on the MR, ETS, DpR, and RECIST ver.1.1. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders according to each method were evaluated using survival analysis. Results: The responders had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, in terms of DpR (≥ median), ETS, objective response rate (ORR) [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)], and disease control rate [CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. Patients with right-sided colon cancers showed better HRs for DpR, but not for ETS and ORR. Contrastingly, patients with left-sided CRCs had better HRs for ETS, DpR, and ORR. MR was not associated with outcomes in this study, even in cases where bevacizumab was used. In patients with liver metastasis, ETS, DpR, and ORR showed better HRs, but not in those with lung metastasis. Conclusion: Early tumor shrinkage and DpR might be predictive markers only in left-sided CRCs with liver metastasis. Each imaging analysis has a different value based on the primary and metastatic sites.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1397-1405
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Clinical Oncology
Volume24
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2019

Fingerprint

Phase II Clinical Trials
Colorectal Neoplasms
Tomography
Drug Therapy
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Metastasis
Survival
Patient Rights
Liver Neoplasms
Survival Analysis
Colonic Neoplasms
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Lung
Liver
Pharmaceutical Preparations

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Hematology
  • Oncology

Cite this

Comparison of computed tomography imaging analyses for evaluation after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer : a retrospective pooled analysis of six phase II clinical trials. / Hirose, Kosuke; Oki, Eiji; Shimose, Takayuki; Sakamoto, Sanae; Sasaki, Shun; Jogo, Tomoko; Hu, Qingjiang; Tsuda, Yasuo; Ando, Koji; Nakashima, Yuichiro; Saeki, Hiroshi; Mori, Masaki.

In: International Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 24, No. 11, 01.11.2019, p. 1397-1405.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4b99da222f5f448ab36fd644f7f2ada8,
title = "Comparison of computed tomography imaging analyses for evaluation after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective pooled analysis of six phase II clinical trials",
abstract = "Background: There are several methods for analyzing computed tomography (CT) images to evaluate chemotherapy efficacy in clinical studies. However, the optimal analysis method for each drug is still under debate. We conducted a pooled analysis using data from six phase II studies to evaluate four analysis methods in colorectal cancers (CRCs): morphological responses (MRs), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) ver.1.1. Methods: We included 249 patients in this analysis. Pretreatments and findings of subsequent CT imaging were analyzed based on the MR, ETS, DpR, and RECIST ver.1.1. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders according to each method were evaluated using survival analysis. Results: The responders had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, in terms of DpR (≥ median), ETS, objective response rate (ORR) [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)], and disease control rate [CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. Patients with right-sided colon cancers showed better HRs for DpR, but not for ETS and ORR. Contrastingly, patients with left-sided CRCs had better HRs for ETS, DpR, and ORR. MR was not associated with outcomes in this study, even in cases where bevacizumab was used. In patients with liver metastasis, ETS, DpR, and ORR showed better HRs, but not in those with lung metastasis. Conclusion: Early tumor shrinkage and DpR might be predictive markers only in left-sided CRCs with liver metastasis. Each imaging analysis has a different value based on the primary and metastatic sites.",
author = "Kosuke Hirose and Eiji Oki and Takayuki Shimose and Sanae Sakamoto and Shun Sasaki and Tomoko Jogo and Qingjiang Hu and Yasuo Tsuda and Koji Ando and Yuichiro Nakashima and Hiroshi Saeki and Masaki Mori",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10147-019-01509-8",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "1397--1405",
journal = "International Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "1341-9625",
publisher = "Springer Japan",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of computed tomography imaging analyses for evaluation after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer

T2 - a retrospective pooled analysis of six phase II clinical trials

AU - Hirose, Kosuke

AU - Oki, Eiji

AU - Shimose, Takayuki

AU - Sakamoto, Sanae

AU - Sasaki, Shun

AU - Jogo, Tomoko

AU - Hu, Qingjiang

AU - Tsuda, Yasuo

AU - Ando, Koji

AU - Nakashima, Yuichiro

AU - Saeki, Hiroshi

AU - Mori, Masaki

PY - 2019/11/1

Y1 - 2019/11/1

N2 - Background: There are several methods for analyzing computed tomography (CT) images to evaluate chemotherapy efficacy in clinical studies. However, the optimal analysis method for each drug is still under debate. We conducted a pooled analysis using data from six phase II studies to evaluate four analysis methods in colorectal cancers (CRCs): morphological responses (MRs), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) ver.1.1. Methods: We included 249 patients in this analysis. Pretreatments and findings of subsequent CT imaging were analyzed based on the MR, ETS, DpR, and RECIST ver.1.1. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders according to each method were evaluated using survival analysis. Results: The responders had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, in terms of DpR (≥ median), ETS, objective response rate (ORR) [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)], and disease control rate [CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. Patients with right-sided colon cancers showed better HRs for DpR, but not for ETS and ORR. Contrastingly, patients with left-sided CRCs had better HRs for ETS, DpR, and ORR. MR was not associated with outcomes in this study, even in cases where bevacizumab was used. In patients with liver metastasis, ETS, DpR, and ORR showed better HRs, but not in those with lung metastasis. Conclusion: Early tumor shrinkage and DpR might be predictive markers only in left-sided CRCs with liver metastasis. Each imaging analysis has a different value based on the primary and metastatic sites.

AB - Background: There are several methods for analyzing computed tomography (CT) images to evaluate chemotherapy efficacy in clinical studies. However, the optimal analysis method for each drug is still under debate. We conducted a pooled analysis using data from six phase II studies to evaluate four analysis methods in colorectal cancers (CRCs): morphological responses (MRs), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) ver.1.1. Methods: We included 249 patients in this analysis. Pretreatments and findings of subsequent CT imaging were analyzed based on the MR, ETS, DpR, and RECIST ver.1.1. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders according to each method were evaluated using survival analysis. Results: The responders had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, in terms of DpR (≥ median), ETS, objective response rate (ORR) [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)], and disease control rate [CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. Patients with right-sided colon cancers showed better HRs for DpR, but not for ETS and ORR. Contrastingly, patients with left-sided CRCs had better HRs for ETS, DpR, and ORR. MR was not associated with outcomes in this study, even in cases where bevacizumab was used. In patients with liver metastasis, ETS, DpR, and ORR showed better HRs, but not in those with lung metastasis. Conclusion: Early tumor shrinkage and DpR might be predictive markers only in left-sided CRCs with liver metastasis. Each imaging analysis has a different value based on the primary and metastatic sites.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069543305&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069543305&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10147-019-01509-8

DO - 10.1007/s10147-019-01509-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 31332611

AN - SCOPUS:85069543305

VL - 24

SP - 1397

EP - 1405

JO - International Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - International Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 1341-9625

IS - 11

ER -