GRACE :: Cancer Basics

Cancer 101 FAQ: How Do You Assess Response to Cancer Treatment?

Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

For most cancers, there is visible evidence of a cancer on scans such as CT scans that are done periodically during the course of a patient’s treatment. A baseline scan is done, ideally just shortly before the start of treatment, and new scans done after some fixed duration of treatment are then compared with the baseline scan. The general concept is to see whether the repeat scans demonstrate tumor shrinkage, an increase in the size of measurable disease or new lesions (indicating progression), or stable findings. For clinical trials, there is a formal definition of complete response, partial response, stable disease, or progression that are incorporated into the RECIST criteria (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), but clinical practice doesn’t tend to be as precise. Obviously, we are happy to see tumor shrinkage even if it falls shy of the formal definition of a partial response, and stable disease is often very welcome compared to an alternative of disease progression.

The role for PET scans in advanced disease to assess response to therapy remains a controversial area. A CT can provide plenty of helpful information for assessing response to therapy once stage has been established, and CT scans are the well studied and validated metric for assessing interval change for cancers with measurable disease. Some people favor getting PET/CTs to clarify response in extreme detail, but there is a real risk of identifying clinically insignificant changes, such as by a minimal increase in the PET uptake of a tumor that remains stable in size, that might lead to a change in management that isn’t clearly necessary.

A related issue is the use of serum tumor markers, which are proteins produced by the cancer, to guide treatment decisions. For some cancers that often don’t have visible evidence of cancer, tumor markers are a favored approach to assessing response (an example is prostate serum antigen (PSA) to measure the ongoing course of prostate cancer in a man). In other cancers, such as pancreatic cancer, a marker like CA 19-9 is generally accepted as a useful index of disease activity, as CA-125 is for colon cancer. However, not all cancers make these markers, leading to their being used with less of a clear role in many cancers. Breast cancer, lung cancer, and some others may have patients with increased serum tumor markers, but not that reliably. Such serum tumor markers are not universally accepted as a standard measure of monitoring disease, and oncologists tend to vary in their level of enthusiasm for using these in decision-making. A leading concern of those who do not favor using them to guide treatment decisions is that, like subtle changes on a PET scan, changes in a serum tumor marker when scans show stable disease (assuming there is visible evidence of disease on imaging) might lead to a decision to change treatments in the setting of clinically insignificant changes.

Individual physicians have different perspectives about their reliance on PET scans and serum tumor markers in monitoring the course of a cancer, but for most solid tumors (cancers of solid organs where there is visible evidence of the cancer), changes in the size of known cancer on serial CT scans at regular intervals of follow-up remain the best studied and most validated way to assess response to treatment or monitor for progression off of treatment.

See additional links for more details:

Stable disease: Is the glass half-empty or half full?
Practical Principles on the approach to mild progression
Incorporating tumor cavitation into response assessment
Podcast on PET scanning in oncology
Serum tumor markers in lung cancer
Podcast discussion of difficulty assessing response after chemo/radiation
Forum discussion of imaging modalities to assess response
Forum discussion of difficulty assessing response after chemo/radiation
Forum discussion of serum tumor markers in guiding treatment decisions


One Response to Cancer 101 FAQ: How Do You Assess Response to Cancer Treatment?

  • dando says:

    Hi
    My wife has NSCLC stage 4 L858R and treated by Tarceva for 6 months.
    She is due to have a CT scan. My question is –
    A. Is it better for her to have PET-CT? will the PET give us better picture of her medical state?
    B. It was mentioned that tarceva is less effective in L858R than in Exon 19 mutations. Does it effect on the frequency of the CT tests?

    Thank you

    Dan Lando

Leave a Reply

Ask Us, Q&A
Cancer Basics Expert Content

Archives

Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

GRACE Cancer Video Library - Lung Cancer Videos

 

2015_Immunotherapy_Forum_Videos

 

2015 Acquired Resistance in Lung Cancer Patient Forum Videos

Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

Join the GRACE Faculty

Lung/Thoracic Cancer Blog
Breast Cancer Blog
Pancreatic Cancer Blog
Bladder Cancer Blog
Head/Neck Cancer Blog
Kidney Cancer Blog
Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

Subscribe to the GRACEcast Podcast on iTunes

Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon

Subscribe to
GRACE Notes
   (Free Newsletter)

Other Resources

Share
download as a pdf file Download PDF of this page

ClinicalTrials.gov


Biomedical Learning Institute

peerview_institute_logo_243