Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jul 1.

Published in final edited form as: Eur J Radiol. 2015 Mar 23;84(7):1259–1268. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.03.017

Fig. 5 — Comparison between irRC using bidimensional measurements and the irRC using unidimensional measurements. (Reprinted with permission from Ref. 18: Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:3936-43.)

A. The percent changes according to bidimensional and unidimensional measurements at each follow-up scan from the 1st to 17th follow-up scans. The orange dashed lines represent the cut-off values for response and progression (−50% and +25% for bidimensional measurements, −30% and +20% for unidimensional measurements). The observations within the top left, middle center, and top right boxes have concordant assessment between tow measurements, whereas observations in other boxes have discordant assessment. The purple dashed line represents +44% change for bidimensional measurements, which corresponds to +20% change for unidimensional measurements, which was given to visually demonstrate that more observations are concordant if this cut-off value is used. The percent changes presented in the figure are in comparison with baseline measurements when tumors are decreasing to assess response and in comparison with the nadir (the smallest measurement since baseline) when tumors are increasing to assess progression. These values are displayed as they are used to define response/progression in patients at the time of response assessment.

B. TTP according to bidimensional versus unidimensional assessment.

Estimates of the 25th percentile (time point at which 75% are free of progression) were 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.5–∞) by bidimensional assessment versus 9.1 months (95% CI, 3.7–∞) by unidimensional assessment. On the basis of the almost identical confidence intervals for the 25 percentile, there is no evidence of a difference in TTP between the 2 methods of assessment.

Fig. 5 — Comparison between irRC using bidimensional measurements and the irRC using unidimensional measurements. (Reprinted with permission from Ref. 18: Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:3936-43.)

A. The percent changes according to bidimensional and unidimensional measurements at each follow-up scan from the 1st to 17th follow-up scans. The orange dashed lines represent the cut-off values for response and progression (−50% and +25% for bidimensional measurements, −30% and +20% for unidimensional measurements). The observations within the top left, middle center, and top right boxes have concordant assessment between tow measurements, whereas observations in other boxes have discordant assessment. The purple dashed line represents +44% change for bidimensional measurements, which corresponds to +20% change for unidimensional measurements, which was given to visually demonstrate that more observations are concordant if this cut-off value is used. The percent changes presented in the figure are in comparison with baseline measurements when tumors are decreasing to assess response and in comparison with the nadir (the smallest measurement since baseline) when tumors are increasing to assess progression. These values are displayed as they are used to define response/progression in patients at the time of response assessment.

B. TTP according to bidimensional versus unidimensional assessment.

Estimates of the 25th percentile (time point at which 75% are free of progression) were 5.3 months (95% CI, 3.5–∞) by bidimensional assessment versus 9.1 months (95% CI, 3.7–∞) by unidimensional assessment. On the basis of the almost identical confidence intervals for the 25 percentile, there is no evidence of a difference in TTP between the 2 methods of assessment.