Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYounes, Aen
dc.contributor.authorHilden, Pen
dc.contributor.authorCoiffier, Ben
dc.contributor.authorHagenbeek, Aen
dc.contributor.authorSalles, Gen
dc.contributor.authorWilson, Wen
dc.contributor.authorSeymour, JFen
dc.contributor.authorKelly, Ken
dc.contributor.authorGribben, Jen
dc.contributor.authorPfreunschuh, Men
dc.contributor.authorMorschhauser, Fen
dc.contributor.authorSchoder, Hen
dc.contributor.authorZelenetz, ADen
dc.contributor.authorRademaker, Jen
dc.contributor.authorAdvani, Ren
dc.contributor.authorValente, Nen
dc.contributor.authorFortpied, Cen
dc.contributor.authorWitzig, TEen
dc.contributor.authorSehn, LHen
dc.contributor.authorEngert, Aen
dc.contributor.authorFisher, RIen
dc.contributor.authorZinzani, P-Len
dc.contributor.authorFederico, Men
dc.contributor.authorHutchings, Men
dc.contributor.authorBollard, Cen
dc.contributor.authorTrneny, Men
dc.contributor.authorElsayed, YAen
dc.contributor.authorTobinai, Ken
dc.contributor.authorAbramson, JSen
dc.contributor.authorFowler, Nen
dc.contributor.authorGoy, Aen
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Men
dc.contributor.authorAnsell, Sen
dc.contributor.authorKuruvilla, Jen
dc.contributor.authorDreyling, Men
dc.contributor.authorThieblemont, Cen
dc.contributor.authorLittle, RFen
dc.contributor.authorAurer, Ien
dc.contributor.authorVan Oers, MHJen
dc.contributor.authorTakeshita, Ken
dc.contributor.authorGopal, Aen
dc.contributor.authorRule, Sen
dc.contributor.authorde Vos, Sen
dc.contributor.authorKloos, Ien
dc.contributor.authorKaminski, MSen
dc.contributor.authorMeignan, Men
dc.contributor.authorSchwartz, LHen
dc.contributor.authorLeonard, JPen
dc.contributor.authorSchuster, SJen
dc.contributor.authorSeshan, VEen

In recent years, the number of approved and investigational agents that can be safely administered for the treatment of lymphoma patients for a prolonged period of time has substantially increased. Many of these novel agents are evaluated in early-phase clinical trials in patients with a wide range of malignancies, including solid tumors and lymphoma. Furthermore, with the advances in genome sequencing, new "basket" clinical trial designs have emerged that select patients based on the presence of specific genetic alterations across different types of solid tumors and lymphoma. The standard response criteria currently in use for lymphoma are the Lugano Criteria which are based on [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography or bidimensional tumor measurements on computerized tomography scans. These differ from the RECIST criteria used in solid tumors, which use unidimensional measurements. The RECIL group hypothesized that single-dimension measurement could be used to assess response to therapy in lymphoma patients, producing results similar to the standard criteria. We tested this hypothesis by analyzing 47 828 imaging measurements from 2983 individual adult and pediatric lymphoma patients enrolled on 10 multicenter clinical trials and developed new lymphoma response criteria (RECIL 2017). We demonstrate that assessment of tumor burden in lymphoma clinical trials can use the sum of longest diameters of a maximum of three target lesions. Furthermore, we introduced a new provisional category of a minor response. We also clarified response assessment in patients receiving novel immune therapy and targeted agents that generate unique imaging situations.

dc.format.extent1436 - 1447en
dc.subjectresponse criteriaen
dc.subjecttargeted therapyen
dc.subjectwaterfall plotsen
dc.subjectAntineoplastic Agentsen
dc.subjectContrast Mediaen
dc.subjectDisease Progressionen
dc.subjectDisease-Free Survivalen
dc.subjectEndpoint Determinationen
dc.subjectFluorodeoxyglucose F18en
dc.subjectLymphoma, Non-Hodgkinen
dc.subjectNeoplasm Stagingen
dc.subjectPositron-Emission Tomographyen
dc.subjectPredictive Value of Testsen
dc.subjectResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumorsen
dc.subjectTime Factorsen
dc.subjectTomography, X-Ray Computeden
dc.subjectTreatment Outcomeen
dc.subjectTumor Burdenen
dc.titleInternational Working Group consensus response evaluation criteria in lymphoma (RECIL 2017).en
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.journalAnn Oncolen
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA01 Clinical Medicine
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA01 Clinical Medicine/UoA01 Clinical Medicine
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CBR
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV