RECIST1.0和mRECIST在肝癌射频消融术后疗效评价中的对比研究

孟宪运; 戴旭; 苏红英; 丁婕; 王冠

中国临床医学影像杂志 ›› 2015, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (10) : 712-715.

论著

RECIST1.0和mRECIST在肝癌射频消融术后疗效评价中的对比研究

孟宪运1，戴旭1，苏红英1，丁婕2，王冠1

作者信息 +

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

Author information +

文章历史 +

摘要

目的：对肝癌患者经皮射频消融（RFA）术前、术后采用RECIST1.0和mRECIST测量比较，为肝癌患者RFA术后提供更准确的疗效评价方法。方法：23例（29个病灶）确诊为原发性肝癌患者至少做过1次RFA，分别于RFA术前1月内、术后3～6月内行CT或MR四期扫描，至少两名放射科医生参与阅片，根据RECIST1.0和mRECIST评价标准评估治疗的缓解、控制程度。两种方法评价疾病控制率的比较采用χ2检验。结果：采用RECIST1.0标准评价的完全缓解（CR）和部分缓解（PR）均为0例、疾病稳定（SD）为6例、疾病进展（PD）为23例，缓解率为00.00%，疾病控制率为20.69%；采用mRECIST标准评价肝癌RFA术后CR为25例、PR为2例、SD为1例、PD为1例，缓解率为93.11%，疾病控制率为96.56%，经χ2检验，P＜0.05，疾病控制率有显著性统计学差异。结论：RECIST1.0标准低估了肝癌RFA局部治疗效果，mRECIST标准强调治疗后动脉期强化存活肿瘤的测量，疗效评价更客观、可靠，对肿瘤术后的后续治疗有一定的指导意义。

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.

导出引用

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]. 中国临床医学影像杂志. 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[J]. Journal of China Clinic Medical Imaging. 2015, 26(10): 712-715

中图分类号： Ｒ735.7 Ｒ814.42