Back to Search Start Over

Consensus Guidelines for the Definition of Time-to-Event End Points in Image-guided Tumor Ablation: Results of the SIO and DATECAN Initiative.

Authors :
Puijk RS
Ahmed M
Adam A
Arai Y
Arellano R
de Baère T
Bale R
Bellera C
Binkert CA
Brace CL
Breen DJ
Brountzos E
Callstrom MR
Carrafiello G
Chapiro J
de Cobelli F
Coupé VMH
Crocetti L
Denys A
Dupuy DE
Erinjeri JP
Filippiadis D
Gangi A
Gervais DA
Gillams AR
Greene T
Guiu B
Helmberger T
Iezzi R
Kang TW
Kelekis A
Kim HS
Kröncke T
Kwan S
Lee MW
Lee FT
Lee EW Jr
Liang P
Lissenberg-Witte BI
Lu DS
Madoff DC
Mauri G
Meloni MF
Morgan R
Nadolski G
Narayanan G
Newton I
Nikolic B
Orsi F
Pereira PL
Pua U
Rhim H
Ricke J
Rilling W
Salem R
Scheffer HJ
Sofocleous CT
Solbiati LA
Solomon SB
Soulen MC
Sze D
Uberoi R
Vogl TJ
Wang DS
Wood BJ
Goldberg SN
Meijerink MR
Source :
Radiology [Radiology] 2021 Dec; Vol. 301 (3), pp. 533-540. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Sep 28.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

There is currently no consensus regarding preferred clinical outcome measures following image-guided tumor ablation or clear definitions of oncologic end points. This consensus document proposes standardized definitions for a broad range of oncologic outcome measures with recommendations on how to uniformly document, analyze, and report outcomes. The initiative was coordinated by the Society of Interventional Oncology in collaboration with the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-Event End Points in Cancer Trials, or DATECAN, group. According to predefined criteria, based on experience with clinical trials, an international panel of 62 experts convened. Recommendations were developed using the validated three-step modified Delphi consensus method. Consensus was reached on when to assess outcomes per patient, per session, or per tumor; on starting and ending time and survival time definitions; and on time-to-event end points. Although no consensus was reached on the preferred classification system to report complications, quality of life, and health economics issues, the panel did agree on using the most recent version of a validated patient-reported outcome questionnaire. This article provides a framework of key opinion leader recommendations with the intent to facilitate a clear interpretation of results and standardize worldwide communication. Widespread adoption will improve reproducibility, allow for accurate comparisons, and avoid misinterpretations in the field of interventional oncology research. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Liddell in this issue.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1527-1315
Volume :
301
Issue :
3
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Radiology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
34581627
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021203715