84 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18788502)
1. Imaging for oncologic staging and follow-up: review of current methods and novel approaches.
Cademartiri F; Luccichenti G; Maffei E; Fusaro M; Palumbo A; Soliani P; Sianesi M; Zompatori M; Crisi G; Krestin GR
Acta Biomed; 2008 Aug; 79(2):85-91. PubMed ID: 18788502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Tumor response evaluation in oncology: current update.
Shanbhogue AK; Karnad AB; Prasad SR
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2010 Jul; 34(4):479-84. PubMed ID: 20657213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Selection of response criteria for clinical trials of sarcoma treatment.
Schuetze SM; Baker LH; Benjamin RS; Canetta R
Oncologist; 2008; 13 Suppl 2():32-40. PubMed ID: 18434637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Novel quantitative techniques for assessing regional and global function and structure based on modern imaging modalities: implications for normal variation, aging and diseased states.
Basu S; Zaidi H; Houseni M; Bural G; Udupa J; Acton P; Torigian DA; Alavi A
Semin Nucl Med; 2007 May; 37(3):223-39. PubMed ID: 17418154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic accuracy of serial CT/magnetic resonance imaging review vs. positron emission tomography/CT in colorectal cancer patients with suspected and known recurrence.
Potter KC; Husband JE; Houghton SL; Thomas K; Brown G
Dis Colon Rectum; 2009 Feb; 52(2):253-9. PubMed ID: 19279420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Response criteria in oncologic imaging: review of traditional and new criteria.
Tirkes T; Hollar MA; Tann M; Kohli MD; Akisik F; Sandrasegaran K
Radiographics; 2013; 33(5):1323-41. PubMed ID: 24025927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Measurement of tumour response to cancer treatment: morphologic imaging role].
Ollivier L; Leclère J; Thiesse P; Di Stefano D; Vincent C
Bull Cancer; 2007 Feb; 94(2):171-7. PubMed ID: 17337386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Radiological monitoring of the treatment of solid tumors in practice.
Ganten MK; Ganten TM; Schlemmer HP
Rofo; 2014 May; 186(5):466-73. PubMed ID: 24563412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors].
Duffaud F; Therasse P
Bull Cancer; 2000 Dec; 87(12):881-6. PubMed ID: 11174117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. PET/CT for the staging and follow-up of patients with malignancies.
Poeppel TD; Krause BJ; Heusner TA; Boy C; Bockisch A; Antoch G
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jun; 70(3):382-92. PubMed ID: 19406595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Radiologic assessment of response to therapy: comparison of RECIST Versions 1.1 and 1.0.
Chalian H; Töre HG; Horowitz JM; Salem R; Miller FH; Yaghmai V
Radiographics; 2011; 31(7):2093-105. PubMed ID: 22084190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Response assessment in clinical trials: implications for sarcoma clinical trial design.
Jaffe CC
Oncologist; 2008; 13 Suppl 2():14-8. PubMed ID: 18434633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Integrated PET/CT and cancer imaging.
De Wever W; Coolen J; Verschakelen JA
JBR-BTR; 2009; 92(1):13-9. PubMed ID: 19358480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: are response evaluation criteria in solid tumors reliable?
Forner A; Ayuso C; Varela M; Rimola J; Hessheimer AJ; de Lope CR; Reig M; Bianchi L; Llovet JM; Bruix J
Cancer; 2009 Feb; 115(3):616-23. PubMed ID: 19117042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Computed tomography, positron emission tomography, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for staging of limited pleural mesothelioma: initial results.
Plathow C; Staab A; Schmaehl A; Aschoff P; Zuna I; Pfannenberg C; Peter SH; Eschmann S; Klopp M
Invest Radiol; 2008 Oct; 43(10):737-44. PubMed ID: 18791416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Whole-body MRI for the staging and follow-up of patients with metastasis.
Schmidt GP; Reiser MF; Baur-Melnyk A
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jun; 70(3):393-400. PubMed ID: 19457631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative study of FDG PET/CT and conventional imaging in the staging of rhabdomyosarcoma.
Tateishi U; Hosono A; Makimoto A; Nakamoto Y; Kaneta T; Fukuda H; Murakami K; Terauchi T; Suga T; Inoue T; Kim EE
Ann Nucl Med; 2009 Feb; 23(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 19225939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Beyond RECIST: molecular and functional imaging techniques for evaluation of response to targeted therapy.
Desar IM; van Herpen CM; van Laarhoven HW; Barentsz JO; Oyen WJ; van der Graaf WT
Cancer Treat Rev; 2009 Jun; 35(4):309-21. PubMed ID: 19136215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Pretreatment diagnostic evaluation of cervical cancer].
Lemke U; Hamm B
Rofo; 2009 May; 181(5):433-40. PubMed ID: 19373746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST): new guidelines.
Tsuchida Y; Therasse P
Med Pediatr Oncol; 2001 Jul; 37(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 11466715
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
