ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2025
Evaluating the tumor response assessment of modified-RECIST 1.1 in advance non-small cell lung cancer: a
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anlotinib plus whole-brain radiotherapy for NSCLC brain metastases: a prospective, non-randomized, single-center cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Prognostic factors analysis of surgical resection after conversion therapy for isolated pleural metastatic lung cancer: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) provides conventional response evaluation in solid tumors. However, RECIST 1.1 measures up to two lesions per organ, which can be time-consuming and less-reliable in terms of reproducibility. This study sought to compare response assessment using RECIST 1.1 and modified RECIST 1.1 (mRECIST 1.1, measuring the single largest lesion per organ) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: This study analyzed the medical files of 1,147 advanced NSCLC patients from the East Asia S-1 Trial in Lung Cancer (EAST-LC) clinical trial. The tumor responses were compared using the RECIST 1.1 and the mRECIST 1.1 by the kappa statistics. And a κ value of >0.75 indicated strong concordance. Concordance index (C-index), which ranges from 0-1, was calculated to evaluate prognostic accuracy of radiologic response according to the two criteria. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were conducted for survival. Statistical analyses were tested at a two-sided significance level of 0.05. Results: The amount of target lesions was lower by mRECIST 1.1 than RECIST 1.1. The best tumor responses revealed a great concordance between two criteria (κ=0.989). The C-index by the two criteria was similar for overall survival (OS) (0.709 versus 0.708) and responders had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and OS versus non-responders (P<0.001) by the RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST 1.1. The median OS using the original RECIST 1.1 criteria was 33.6 months in the complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) arm, 18.6 months in the stable disease (SD) arm, and 7.3 months in the progressive disease (PD) arm. When the mRECIST 1.1 criteria were applied, the median OS of the above three groups was 30.9, 18.3 and 7.3 months, respectively. Patients were also stratified into four groups using quartiles of the absolute PFS value according to the two criteria. In comparison with RECIST 1.1, the median OS were 5.8 versus 6.0 months, 8.3 versus 8.4 months, 14.5 versus 14.6 months, and 25.6 versus 25.6 months in the lowest quartile, 2 Conclusions: mRECIST 1.1 was comparable to RECIST 1.1 and might be preferable owing to its convenience in the assessment of tumor response in advanced NSCLC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.