June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Retinoblastoma (RB) response assessment after intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) according to the RB-RECIST guidelines
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Buse Guneri Beser
    Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Emily Chang
    Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Neeraj Chaudhary
    Division of Neurointerventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Laura Sedig
    Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Amy Edmonds
    Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Raymond J Hutchinson
    Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • HAKAN DEMIRCI
    Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Buse Guneri Beser None; Emily Chang None; Neeraj Chaudhary None; Laura Sedig None; Amy Edmonds None; Raymond Hutchinson None; HAKAN DEMIRCI None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 2337 – A0006. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Buse Guneri Beser, Emily Chang, Neeraj Chaudhary, Laura Sedig, Amy Edmonds, Raymond J Hutchinson, HAKAN DEMIRCI; Retinoblastoma (RB) response assessment after intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) according to the RB-RECIST guidelines. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):2337 – A0006.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) provide radiological standards for solid tumor assessment. However, RECIST is not sufficiently compatible with the evaluation of RB. In May 2021, Berry JL et al. presented a new guideline about response criteria for retinoblastoma (RB-RECIST). We considered the clinical outcomes of RB patients treated with IAC according to the RB-RECIST recommendations.

Methods : A retrospective analysis of all RB patients treated with IAC (melphalan with additional topotecan and/or carboplatin) at Kellogg Eye Center between 2015 and 2021 was performed. Patients who had at least 6 months of follow-up after cessation of first- and/or second-line plus consolidation therapy were included.

Results : 21 eyes of 18 patients (72% females) were analyzed. The eyes were classified according to the International Classification of Retinoblastoma as group B (n=2), C (n=7), D (n=6), or E (n=6). The mean age at IAC was 21 months. Each eye received a mean of 5.6 ± 1.4 IAC sessions (range, 3-9). Consolidation therapy (cryotherapy or transpupillary thermotherapy) was applied in 76%, and intravitreal chemotherapy was injected in 57%. After IAC with a mean follow-up time of 33 months, globe salvage was achieved in 16 eyes(76%). Tumor recurrence (n=1, group C), vitreous hemorrhage (n=1, group D), and neovascular glaucoma (n=3, group E) were the reasons for enucleation. The ocular findings in the last follow-up exam or the exam before enucleation were assessed according to RB-RECIST. Tumor and vitreous seeds regression patterns were demonstrated in Table 1. A complete response(CR) in the tumor was seen 100% in group B, 86% in C, 100% in D, 50% in E. 1 eye(14%) in group C showed progressive disease(PD), and 3 eyes(50%) in group E had a partial response(PR) in the tumor. There was no stable disease(SD). During the study, vitreous seeds were observed in 14 eyes(67%) and subretinal seeds in 12 eyes(57%). CR in vitreous seeds was noted 50% in Group C, 83% in D, 67% in E; CR in subretinal seeding was established 100% in C, 83% in D, 60 % in E (Table 2).

Conclusions : Reporting of outcomes in RB is not standardized. These RB-RECIST guidelines may provide a standardized assessment for tumor response in studies of RB therapy.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

 

Table 1. Tumor and vitreous seeds regression patterns at the last visit

Table 1. Tumor and vitreous seeds regression patterns at the last visit

 

Table 2. RB response assessment according to RB-RECIST at the last visit

Table 2. RB response assessment according to RB-RECIST at the last visit

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×