This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Scher, H. I. Articles by Heller, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Scher, H. I. Articles by Heller, G.

Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial End Points: "RECIST"ing a Step Backwards

Authors' Affiliations: ¹ Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine; Departments of ² Radiology and ³ Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; and ⁴ Department of Medicine, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York

Requests for reprints: Howard I. Scher, Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancer, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021. Phone: 646-422-4323; Fax: 212-988-0851; E-mail: scherh{at}mskcc.org.

Purpose: To relate clinical issues to the clinical manifestations of prostate cancers across disease states using the eligibility and outcome criteria defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST).

Experimental Design: The manifestations of prostate cancer that characterize localized, recurrent, and metastatic disease were considered using the eligibility criteria for trials defined by RECIST. To do so, we analyzed the sites, size, and distribution of lesions in patients enrolled on contemporary Institutional Review Board–approved trials for progressive castrate and noncastrate metastatic disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were also assessed. RECIST-defined outcome measures for tumor regression were then applied to the metastatic patient cohorts, and separately to the states of a rising PSA (noncastrate and castrate) and localized disease.

Results: Only 43.5% of men with castrate metastatic and 16% of noncastrate metastatic disease had measurable target lesions >2 cm in size. Overall, 84.4% of the target lesions were lymph nodes, of which 67.7% were 2 cm in the long axis. There are no target lesions in patients in the states of a rising PSA and localized disease, making them ineligible for trials under these criteria. PSA-based eligibility and outcomes under RECIST conflict with established reporting standards for the states of a rising PSA and castrate metastatic disease. The clinical manifestations of prostate cancer across multiple disease states are not addressed adequately using the eligibility criteria and outcomes measures defined by RECIST. Important treatment effects are not described.

Conclusions: Trial eligibility and end points based solely on tumor regression are not applicable to the majority of the clinical manifestations of prostate cancers representing all clinical states. Treatment effects can be described more precisely if eligibility criteria are adapted to the clinical question being addressed and clinical state under study, focusing on the duration of benefit defined biochemically, radiographically, and/or clinically.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Olmos, H.-T. Arkenau, J. E. Ang, I. Ledaki, G. Attard, C. P. Carden, A. H. M. Reid, R. A'Hern, P. C. Fong, N. B. Oomen, et al. Circulating tumour cell (CTC) counts as intermediate end points in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC): a single-centre experience Ann. Onc., August 11, 2008; (2008) mdn544v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. N. Chi, S. L. Ellard, S. J. Hotte, P. Czaykowski, M. Moore, J. D. Ruether, A. J. Schell, S. Taylor, C. Hansen, I. Gauthier, et al. A phase II study of sorafenib in patients with chemo-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer Ann. Onc., April 1, 2008; 19(4): 746 - 751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. I. Scher, S. Halabi, I. Tannock, M. Morris, C. N. Sternberg, M. A. Carducci, M. A. Eisenberger, C. Higano, G. J. Bubley, R. Dreicer, et al. Design and End Points of Clinical Trials for Patients With Progressive Prostate Cancer and Castrate Levels of Testosterone: Recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group J. Clin. Oncol., March 1, 2008; 26(7): 1148 - 1159. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. R. Shaffer, M. A. Leversha, D. C. Danila, O. Lin, R. Gonzalez-Espinoza, B. Gu, A. Anand, K. Smith, P. Maslak, G. V. Doyle, et al. Circulating Tumor Cell Analysis in Patients with Progressive Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., April 1, 2007; 13(7): 2023 - 2029. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. I. Scher, M. Warren, and G. Heller The Association Between Measures of Progression and Survival in Castrate-Metastatic Prostate Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., March 1, 2007; 13(5): 1488 - 1492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. B. Agus, C. J. Sweeney, M. J. Morris, D. S. Mendelson, D. G. McNeel, F. R. Ahmann, J. Wang, M. K. Derynck, K. Ng, B. Lyons, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Single-Agent Pertuzumab (rhuMAb 2C4), a Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Dimerization Inhibitor, in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer After Progression From Taxane-Based Therapy J. Clin. Oncol., February 20, 2007; 25(6): 675 - 681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. C. Jaffe Measures of Response: RECIST, WHO, and New Alternatives J. Clin. Oncol., July 10, 2006; 24(20): 3245 - 3251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Larson and L. H. Schwartz 18F-FDG PET as a Candidate for "Qualified Biomarker": Functional Assessment of Treatment Response in Oncology J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2006; 47(6): 901 - 903. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. H. Schwartz, J. A. C. Colville, M. S. Ginsberg, L. Wang, M. Mazumdar, J. Kalaigian, H. Hricak, D. Ilson, and G. K. Schwartz Measuring tumor response and shape change on CT: esophageal cancer as a paradigm Ann. Onc., June 1, 2006; 17(6): 1018 - 1023. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. I. Scher and C. L. Sawyers Biology of Progressive, Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Directed Therapies Targeting the Androgen-Receptor Signaling Axis J. Clin. Oncol., November 10, 2005; 23(32): 8253 - 8261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]