» Articles » PMID: 34117911

Inter-center Agreement of MRECIST in Transplanted Patients for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the inter-observer reliability of modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (mRECIST) of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing neo-adjuvant treatments before liver transplant (LT). The agreement of tumor number, size, transplant criteria, and the radiological-pathological concordance were also assessed.

Methods: A total of 180 radiological studies before/after neo-adjuvant therapies performed on 90 patients prior to LT were reviewed from three expert centers. Kappa-statistic and intraclass correlation (ICC) were evaluated on mRECIST and on tumoral features. Complete radiological response (CR) was compared with complete pathological response (CPR).

Results: Before neo-adjuvant therapies, the agreement on tumor number, size, and transplant criteria ranged from moderate (defined as ICC of 0.41-0.60) to almost perfect (ICC of 0.81-0.99), being higher with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) than CT (0.657-0.899 and 0.422-0.776, respectively). After neo-adjuvant therapies, the agreement decreased, as ICCs ranged between 0.518 and 0.663 with MRI and between 0.508 and 0.677 with CT. Concordant mRECIST pairs were 201 of 270 reviews (76.3%) with a kappa of 0.648 indicating substantial agreement. When the three observers completely agreed on CR, the positive predictive value for CPR was 51.6%. The negative predictive value was 94.2% with a kappa of 0.512 indicating fair agreement between radiology and pathology.

Conclusions: mRECIST agreement was substantial among the three observers involved. The agreement on tumor number, size, and transplant criteria ranged from moderate to almost perfect, with the highest ICCs obtained with MRI before neo-adjuvant therapies. Finally, the predictive value of mRECIST in the diagnosis of CPR was only fair.

Key Points: • The review of 180 radiological exams of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma before and after neo-adjuvant therapies showed that the concordance among three different raters on mRECIST diagnosis was substantial. • The inter-observer reliability on fulfilment of transplant criteria slightly decreased when evaluated through CT and after loco-regional therapies. • The radiological diagnosis of complete response after neo-adjuvant therapies was predictive of complete pathological response in only 51.6% of cases.

Citing Articles

Response to Bridging Therapy as a Prognostic Indicator of Post-Transplantation Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence and Survival: A Systematic Review.

Topolewski P, Laski D, Lukasiewicz M, Domagala P, de Wilde R, Polak W Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(22).

PMID: 39594819 PMC: 11592521. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16223862.


Cancer Immunotherapy and Medical Imaging Research Trends from 2003 to 2023: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Tang S, Fan T, Wang X, Yu C, Zhang C, Zhou Y J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024; 17:2105-2120.

PMID: 38736544 PMC: 11086400. DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S457367.


Impact of Pre-Liver Transplant Treatments on the Imaging Accuracy of HCC Staging and Their Influence on Outcomes.

Franchi E, Dondossola D, Marini G, Iavarone M, Del Prete L, Di Benedetto C Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(5).

PMID: 38473400 PMC: 10930548. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16051043.


The role of F-FDG PET in predicting the pathological response and prognosis to unresectable HCC patients treated with lenvatinib and PD-1 inhibitors as a conversion therapy.

Wang G, Zhang W, Luan X, Wang Z, Liu J, Xu X Front Immunol. 2023; 14:1151967.

PMID: 37215117 PMC: 10196479. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1151967.


The prognostic role of early tumor shrinkage in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing immunotherapy.

Muller L, Gairing S, Kloeckner R, Foerster F, Schleicher E, Weinmann A Cancer Imaging. 2022; 22(1):54.

PMID: 36153569 PMC: 9509639. DOI: 10.1186/s40644-022-00487-x.

References
1.
Cescon M, Cucchetti A, Ravaioli M, Pinna A . Hepatocellular carcinoma locoregional therapies for patients in the waiting list. Impact on transplantability and recurrence rate. J Hepatol. 2012; 58(3):609-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2012.09.021. View

2.
Cucchetti A, Serenari M, Sposito C, Di Sandro S, Mosconi C, Vicentin I . Including mRECIST in the Metroticket 2.0 criteria improves prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma-related death after liver transplant. J Hepatol. 2020; 73(2):342-348. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2020.03.018. View

3.
DiNorcia J, Florman S, Haydel B, Tabrizian P, Ruiz R, Klintmalm G . Pathologic Response to Pretransplant Locoregional Therapy is Predictive of Patient Outcome After Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Analysis From the US Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium. Ann Surg. 2019; 271(4):616-624. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003253. View

4.
Mazzaferro V, Citterio D, Bhoori S, Bongini M, Miceli R, De Carlis L . Liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma after tumour downstaging (XXL): a randomised, controlled, phase 2b/3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020; 21(7):947-956. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30224-2. View

5.
Cillo U, Burra P, Mazzaferro V, Belli L, Pinna A, Spada M . A Multistep, Consensus-Based Approach to Organ Allocation in Liver Transplantation: Toward a "Blended Principle Model". Am J Transplant. 2015; 15(10):2552-61. DOI: 10.1111/ajt.13408. View