Zusammenfassung
Der vorliegende Beitrag erläutert auf der Basis der aktuellen Literatur verschiedene radiologische Methoden zur Beurteilung des Therapieansprechens. Eindimensionale Messungen der Tumorgröße entsprechend der Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) sind am weitesten verbreitet. Die dort definierten Größenänderungen entscheiden über die Kategorien Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD) und Progressive Disease (PD), die als prägnante Bewertung des Therapieerfolgs eine hohe Akzeptanz besitzen. Probleme der größenbasierten Therapiebewertung ergeben sich verstärkt bei der zielgerichteten Therapie („targeted therapy“) sowie durch Phänomene wie die Pseudoprogression. Verschiedene Formen der funktionellen Bildgebung sowie der gegenwärtige Stellenwert dieser Methoden unter Berücksichtigung onkologischer Anforderungen werden vorgestellt.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literatur
Padhani AR, Miles KA (2010) Multipa- rametric imaging of tumor response to therapy. Radiology 256:348–364
Yaghmai V, Miller FH, Rezai P et al (2011) Response to treatment series: part 2, tumor response assessment - using new and conventional criteria. AJRAm J Roentgenol 197:18–27
World Health Organization (1979) WHO Handbookfor Reporting Results of CancerTreatment. Genf
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to eva- luate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247
Stattaus J, Hahn S, GaulerTet al (2009) Osteoblastic response as a healing reaction to chemotherapy mimicking progressive disease in pa- tients with small cell lung cancer. Eur Radiol 19:193–200
Hopper KD, Kasales CJ, Van SlykeMA et al (1996) Analysis of interobserver and intraobserver variability in CT tumor measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:851–854
Oxnard GR, Zhao B, Sima CS et al (2011) Variability of lung tumor measurements on repeat computed to- mographyscanstaken within 15 mi- nutes. J Clin Oncol 29:3114–3119
Kalkmann J, Ladd SC, de Greift A et al (2009) Suitability of semi-automated tumor response assessment of liver metastases using a dedicated Software package. Rofo 182:581–588
Cademartiri F, Luccichenti G, Maffei E et al (2008) Imaging for oncologic staging andfollow-up: reviewof current methods and novel approaches. Acta Biomed 79:85–91
Fabel M, Bolte H (2008) Automatisierte Verfahren zur Volumetrie von Metastasen: Ermittlung der Tumorlast. Radiologe 48:857–862
LlovetJM, Di Bisceglie AM, BruixJ et al (2008) Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular Carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:698–711
Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC et al (2007) Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with meta- static gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single Institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 25:1753–1759
BauerS, Hartmann JT, de WitM et al (2005) Resection of residual disease in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors responding to treatment with imatinib. Int J Cancer 117:316–325
Nathan PD, Vinayan A, Stott D et al (2010) CT response assessment com- bining reduction in both size and ar- terial phase density correlates with time to progression in metastatic renal cancer patients treated with tar- geted therapies. Cancer Biol Ther 9:15–19
Smith AD, Shah SN, Rini Bl et al (2010) Morphology, Attenuation, Size, and Structure (MASS) criteria: as- sessing response and predicting clinical outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma on antiangiogenic targeted therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1470–1478
Van Persijn van Meerten EL, Gelder- blom H, Bloem JL (2010) RECIST revised: implicationsforthe radiologist. A review article on the modified RECIST guideline. Eur Radiol 20:1456–1467
Willett CG, BoucherY, DiTomaso E et al (2004) Direct evidence that the VEGF-specific antibody bevacizumab has antivascular effects in human rectal cancer. Nat Med 10:145–147
Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV (2009) Body perfusion CT: technique, clinical applications, and advances. Radiol Clin North Am 47:161–178
Hutchings M, Barrington SF (2009) PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma. J Nud Med 50(Suppl 1 ):21 S–30S
Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:579–586
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y et al (2009) From RECIST to PERCIST: evol- ving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50(Suppl 1 ):122S–150S
O'connor JP, Jackson A, Parker GJ et al (2012) Dynamic contrast-enhan- ced MRI in clinical trials of antivascular therapies. Nat RevClin Oncol 9:167–177
Marinovich ML, Sardanelli F, Ciatto S et al (2012) Early prediction of pa- thologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer: systematic review of the accuracy of MRI. Breast 21:669–677
Gossmann A, Helbich TH, Kuriyama N et al (2002) Dynamic contrast-en- hanced magnetic resonance imaging as a Surrogate markerof tumor response to anti-angiogenic therapy in a xenograft model of glioblastoma multiforme. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:233–240
Hamstra DA, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD (2007) Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol 25:4104–4109
Kamel IR, Bluemke DA, Ramsey D et al (2003) Roleofdiffusion-weighted imaging in estimating tumor necro- sis after chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:708–710
Kamel IR, Bluemke DA, Eng J et al (2006) The roleoffunctional MR imaging in the assessment of tumor response after chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Vase Interv Radiol 17:505–512
Theilmann RJ, Borders RJrouardTP et al (2004) Changes in water mobili- ty measured by diffusion MRI predict response of metastatic breast cancer to chemotherapy. Neoplasia 6:831–837
Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stattaus, J. (2015). Onkologische Bildgebung zur Beurteilung des Therapieansprechens. In: Delorme, S., Reimer, P., Reith, W., Schäfer-Prokop, C., Schüller-Weidekamm, C., Uhl, M. (eds) Weiterbildung Radiologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46785-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46785-5_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46784-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46785-5
eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)