Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33871762›Full record

ReviewReviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders2021

Are recist criteria adequate in assessing the response to therapy in metastatic NEN?

Marie-Pierre Vullierme, Philippe Ruszniewski, Louis de Mestier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marie-Pierre VulliermeDepartment of Radiology, University Hospitals Paris-Nord Val-de-Seine, AP-HP, Beaujon, 92110, Clichy, France. marie-pierre.vullierme@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3667-8943
Philippe RuszniewskiDepartment of Pancreatology, University Hospitals Paris-Nord Val-de-Seine, AP-HP, Beaujon, 92110, Clichy, France.
Louis de MestierDepartment of Pancreatology, University Hospitals Paris-Nord Val-de-Seine, AP-HP, Beaujon, 92110, Clichy, France.
Délégation Paris 7 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Response to therapy criteria, known as RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours), are widely used to evaluate neuroendocrine tumours (NET) metastatic to the liver, under treatment. RECIST criteria does not take in account many various distinct features such as tumour growth, secretory capacity and anatomical localisation with wide variation in clinical and biological presentation of different NETs. Key features of RECIST includes definitions of the minimal size of measurable lesions, instructions on how many lesions to measure and follow, and the use of unidimensional, rather than bidimensional, measures for overall evaluation of tumour burden. These measures are currently done with computed tomography (CT) or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). RECIST criteria are accurate in assessing tumour progression but sometimes inaccurate in assessing tumour response after locoregional therapy or under molecular targeted therapy, tumour vessels being part of the target of such treatments. There is poor correlation between a so called tumour necrosis and conventional methods of response assessment, which poses questions of how best to quantify efficacy of these targeted therapies. Variations in tumour density with computed tomography (CT) could theoretically be associated with tumour necrosis. This hypothesis has been studied proposing alternative CT criteria of response evaluation in metastatic digestive NET treated with targeted therapy. If preliminary results upon the poor relationship between density measured with CT (derived from CHOI criteria) evolution curves at CT and PFS are confirmed by further studies, showing that the correlation between density changing and response to non-targeted treatment is weak, the use of contrast injection, will probably be not mandatory to enable appropriate evaluation.

Indexed as

Neuroendocrine TumorsTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMolecular Targeted TherapyResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsComputerized Tomography (CT)LiverMagnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)MetastasesNeuroendocrine tumour

Identifiers

PMID33871762
OpenAlexW3153308763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.