ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2017
Alternative Response Criteria and Clinical Risk Factors for Assessing Tumor Response in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Who Are Receiving Salvage Therapy.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of enhancement modifications in evaluating tumor response to immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Tumori · 2023Article
- Review
- Imaging for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.The Urologic clinics of North America · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to compare the prognostic value of various solid tumor response criteria as well as the additive value of clinical risk factors in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo sets of CT scans (pretreatment scans and scans obtained 1-3.5 months after treatment) were reviewed for 57 patients with metastatic RCC treated with pazopanib in the salvage setting. Tumor response on the posttherapy scan was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and Choi, modified Choi (mChoi), MASS (Morphology, Attenuation, Size, and Structure), and 10% threshold criteria. In addition, combined Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk factors plus imaging criteria were used to define response groups. Response evaluations using these criteria were correlated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), with use of the log-rank test.
resultsPatients classified as having progressive disease (PD) on the basis of RECIST, mChoi, and MASS criteria had a significantly worse OS than patients with stable disease (SD) and partial response (PR). With the addition of MSKCC risk factors, all groups with PD defined by combined criteria had significantly worse OS. For 37 patients with no or one MSKCC risk factor, response groups defined by Choi, mChoi, MASS, and 10% threshold criteria did not differ in PFS or OS. However, among 20 patients with two to three MSKCC risk factors, those classified as having PR had longer PFS than did those with SD and had longer OS than did those with PD.
conclusionFor patients with advanced RCC for which prior therapies have failed, the prognostic value of various imaging-based tumor response criteria differs on the basis of the MSKCC clinical risk status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.