RECIL Versus Lugano for Treatment Response Assessment in FDG-Avid Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas: A Head-to-Head Comparison in 54 Patients

Abstract

The response evaluation criteria in lymphoma (RECIL) classification for lymphoma treatment response assessment was introduced in 2017, but it has not yet been compared to the established Lugano classification. Also, the value of the provisional “minor response” (MiR) category of RECIL is unclear. In 54 patients with FDG-avid non-Hodgkin lymphomas (41 diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) and 13 follicular lymphomas), [18F]FDG-PET/CT-based response according to RECIL and Lugano was determined at interim and end-of-treatment (EOT) restaging. Rates of agreement and Cohen’s kappa (κ) coefficients were calculated. The relationship between RECIL and Lugano responses and 2-year complete remission (CR) status of DLBCL patients was determined. At interim restaging, MiR was observed in 14.8%, and at EOT, in 5.6% of patients. When MiR was recoded as partial remission, agreement between RECIL and Lugano was 83.3% at interim restaging (κ = 0.69), and 90.7% at EOT (κ = 0.79). 85.4%, of DLBCL patients with responding disease at interim restaging according to both RECIL and Lugano achieved 2-year CR status; whereas, at EOT, 82.9% of patients with responding disease according to Lugano, and 85.4% of patients with responding disease according to RECIL, achieved 2-year CR status. Thus, RECIL and Lugano classifications show comparable performance for treatment response assessment, and a similar association with 2-year CR status in FDG-avid lymphomas.