A comparative study of tumor response by RECIST1.0 and mRECIST in patients treated with RFA for hepatic carcinoma
MENG Xian-yun1, DAI Xu1, SU Hong-ying1, DING Jie2, WANG Guan1
1. Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, China; 2. Department of Radiology, Ningxia People’s Hospital, Yinchuan 750002, China
Abstract：Objective: To compare RECIST1.0 and mRECIST criteria with CT or MRI in evaluation of patients treated with RFA for hepatic carcinoma for a more appropriate application criterion． Methods: Twenty-three patients(29 lesions) diagnosed with hepatic carcinoma took at least one RFA treatment. CT or MR scan was performed witnin 1 month before treatment and 3～6 months after treatment. According to RECIST1.0 and mRECIST evaluation criteria, at least two radiologists assessed the degree of remission and therapy control. The disease control rate was evaluated with χ2 test by both methods. Results: The evaluation of RECIST1.0 in hepatic carcinoma after RFA for CR was 0, PR was 0, SD was 6, PD was 23, response rate was 00.00%, and the disease control rate was 20.69%. The evaluation of mRECIST in hepatic carcinoma after RFA for CR was 25, PR was 2, SD was 1, PD was 1, response rate was 93.11%, and the disease control rate was 96.56%(χ2 test, P＜0.05). The disease control rate for both methods had significant differences. Conclusion: RECIST1.0 criterion underestimates the extent of tumor response after RFA in hepatic carcinoma. The evaluation of mRECIST for hepatic carcinoma after RFA is more objective and reliable. It emphasizes the measurement of enhanced viable tumor in arterial phase by CT or MRI scan, which can play a decisive role for subsequent treatment.
孟宪运;戴 旭;苏红英;丁 婕;王 冠. RECIST1.0和mRECIST在肝癌射频消融术后疗效评价中的对比研究[J]. , 2015, 26(10): 712-715.
MENG Xian-yun;DAI Xu;SU Hong-ying;DING Jie;WANG Guan. A comparative study of tumor response by RECIST1.0 and mRECIST in patients treated with RFA for hepatic carcinoma. , 2015, 26(10): 712-715.
2015, Vol. 26 
