1 255

Cited 50 times in

Prospective comparison of prognostic values of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours with European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria in hepatocellular carcinoma following chemoembolisation

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.author김경아-
dc.contributor.author김명진-
dc.contributor.author김범경-
dc.contributor.author김승업-
dc.contributor.author박준용-
dc.contributor.author안상훈-
dc.contributor.author전재윤-
dc.contributor.author한광협-
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-18T08:35:30Z-
dc.date.available2014-12-18T08:35:30Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.issn0959-8049-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/86592-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUNDS: European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (mRECIST) guidelines, which measure changes in arterialised hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), differ in terms of number of target lesions (all versus ≤2) and calculation method (bidimensional versus unidimensional). We compared prognostic values of mRECIST for predicting overall survival (OS) with reference to EASL criteria in treatment-naïve HCC undergoing trans-arterial chemoembolisation (TACE). METHODS: The ability to predict OS during longitudinal follow-up was expressed as C-index, and a sample size of 292 patients was required to validate its equivalence between each criteria. Treatment responses were assessed using both guidelines 4weeks after the first TACE, using dynamic computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to explore differences in OS between responders (complete or partial) and non-responders (stable or progressive disease), defined by each method. RESULTS: C-index for EASL and mRECIST guidelines was 0.753 and 0.759, respectively, demonstrating equivalence between two methods. Differences in median OS between responders and non-responders were statistically significant for both EASL (30.1 versus 18.7 months, p<0.001) and mRECIST (33.8 versus 17.1 months, p<0.001) guidelines. In addition to radiological response, α-fetoprotein (p<0.001), tumour number (p<0.001) and tumour size (p=0.048) were significant predictors of OS. In multivariate analysis, radiological criteria, tumour number and α-fetoprotein were identified as independent predictors (all p<0.05). CONCLUSION: mRECIST, a simpler method, provided prognostic values for predicting OS equivalent to EASL criteria in patients with HCC undergoing TACE as an initial treatment modality.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.relation.isPartOfEuropean Journal of Cancer-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/-
dc.subject.MESHAdult-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Hepatocellular/mortality-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology-
dc.subject.MESHCarcinoma, Hepatocellular/therapy*-
dc.subject.MESHChemoembolization, Therapeutic*-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHFollow-Up Studies-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Function Tests-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Neoplasms/mortality-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Neoplasms/pathology-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Neoplasms/therapy*-
dc.subject.MESHLongitudinal Studies-
dc.subject.MESHMagnetic Resonance Imaging-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHPrognosis-
dc.subject.MESHProspective Studies-
dc.subject.MESHSurvival Rate-
dc.subject.MESHTomography, X-Ray Computed-
dc.subject.MESHalpha-Fetoproteins/metabolism-
dc.titleProspective comparison of prognostic values of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours with European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria in hepatocellular carcinoma following chemoembolisation-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Internal Medicine (내과학)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBeom Kyung Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKyung Ah Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJun Yong Park-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSang Hoon Ahn-
dc.contributor.googleauthorChae Yoon Chon-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKwang-Hyub Han-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeung Up Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMyeong-Jin Kim-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejca.2012.08.022-
dc.admin.authorfalse-
dc.admin.mappingfalse-
dc.contributor.localIdA00426-
dc.contributor.localIdA00487-
dc.contributor.localIdA00654-
dc.contributor.localIdA01675-
dc.contributor.localIdA02226-
dc.contributor.localIdA04268-
dc.contributor.localIdA03544-
dc.contributor.localIdA00301-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00809-
dc.identifier.pmid22995582-
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959804912006843-
dc.subject.keywordmRECIST-
dc.subject.keywordEASL-
dc.subject.keywordOverall survival-
dc.subject.keywordPrediction-
dc.subject.keywordEquivalence-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Kyung Ah-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Myeong Jin-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Beom Kyung-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Seung Up-
dc.contributor.alternativeNamePark, Jun Yong-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameAhn, Sang Hoon-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameChon, Chae Yoon-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameHan, Kwang Hyup-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Myeong Jin-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Beom Kyung-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Seung Up-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorPark, Jun Yong-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorAhn, Sang Hoon-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorHan, Kwang Hyup-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorChon, Chae Yoon-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Kyung Ah-
dc.rights.accessRightsnot free-
dc.citation.volume49-
dc.citation.number4-
dc.citation.startPage826-
dc.citation.endPage834-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationEuropean Journal of Cancer, Vol.49(4) : 826-834, 2013-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.