A practical guide to measure "all" malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors by modified RECIST criteria?

Our plain-English summary of A practical guide to measure "all" malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors by modified RECIST criteria?, by K. Nackaerts, J. Vansteenkiste, P. Nafteux (Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 2011).

The study

• Authors: K. Nackaerts, J. Vansteenkiste, P. Nafteux
• Journal: Journal of Thoracic Oncology
• Published: 2011;6(12):2143-4; author reply 2144-5
• Type of article: Letter, Comment
• Cited by: 1 article, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This item was a letter to the editor, followed by a reply from the authors it addressed. It was not a research study, reported no patient data and did not discuss asbestos. The letter writers, from Leuven, Belgium, responded to a practical guide by Tsao et al. on measuring malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors on CT scans using modified RECIST criteria. They wrote that the guide lacked tips for evaluating cases with minimal, rind-like pleural thickening or non-measurable disease. They described the method used in an earlier mesothelioma drug trial they took part in, in which pleural rind thickness was measured at three separate levels on CT. They noted that "evaluable" disease was defined as pleural lesions with perpendicular diameters smaller than 1.0 cm. They asked for a complete guide covering all possible cases. In reply, Tsao and colleagues agreed the challenges were significant. They said their guide was meant as a step-by-step manual for Southwest Oncology Group institutions. They also wrote that no validated technology existed for "nonmeasurable but evaluable" tumors and that additional prospective trials were needed.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Letter to the editor commenting on a published practical guide (Tsao et al.), with a reply from the guide's authors; no study data
• Who was studied: No patients were studied; the letter writers were clinicians at University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium
• Main results:
  • The letter writers said the Tsao et al. guide lacked tips for evaluating mesothelioma cases with radiologically minimal rind-like thickening or non-measurable disease
  • The letter writers described the measurement method in a trial they took part in: pleural rind thickness was measured at three separate levels on transverse CT cuts
  • The letter writers noted that, under that trial protocol, evaluable disease was defined as pleural lesions on CT scan with perpendicular diameters smaller than 1.0 cm
  • In reply, Tsao and colleagues agreed with the letter writers about the radiographic challenges
  • The reply said the guide was intended as a step-by-step manual to make disease measurements more consistent for Southwest Oncology Group institutions
  • The reply said no technology had been validated or was consistently accurate for measuring 'nonmeasurable but evaluable' mesothelioma tumors
• The authors' conclusion: The letter writers proposed that the guide's authors provide clinicians with a complete practical guide for all possible mesothelioma cases. The reply's authors concluded that additional prospective trials with radiographic correlates were needed.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Mesothelioma.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Pleural Mesothelioma, Modified RECIST (mRECIST).

Related studies

• A practical guide of the Southwest Oncology Group to measure malignant pleural mesothelioma tumors by RECIST and modified RECIST criteria — A.S. Tsao, L. Garland, et al. (2011)
• Revised Modified RECIST Criteria in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Version 1.1): A Step Forward in a Long Race — A.S. Tsao, G.W. Gladish, et al. (2018)
• Revised Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors for Assessment of Response in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Version 1.1) — S.G. Armato, A.K. Nowak (2018)
• Comparison of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria, and PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors for evaluation of tumor response to chemotherapy and prognosis prediction in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma — K. Kitajima, M. Maruyama, et al. (2020)
• Commentary on pathologic diagnosis of asbestosis and critique of the 2010 Asbestosis Committee of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and Pulmonary Pathology Society's (PPS) update on the diagnostic criteria for pathologic asbestosis — S.P. Hammar, J.L. Abraham (2015)
• Metabolic response assessment with 18F-FDG-PET/CT is superior to modified RECIST for the evaluation of response to platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma — S. Kanemura, K. Kuribayashi, et al. (2017)

Browse more research in Journal of Thoracic Oncology, or return to medical research.