160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19414682)
1. Evaluation of the optimal number of lesions needed for tumor evaluation using the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors: a north central cancer treatment group investigation.
Hillman SL; An MW; O'Connell MJ; Goldberg RM; Schaefer P; Buckner JC; Sargent DJ
J Clin Oncol; 2009 Jul; 27(19):3205-10. PubMed ID: 19414682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).
Eisenhauer EA; Therasse P; Bogaerts J; Schwartz LH; Sargent D; Ford R; Dancey J; Arbuck S; Gwyther S; Mooney M; Rubinstein L; Shankar L; Dodd L; Kaplan R; Lacombe D; Verweij J
Eur J Cancer; 2009 Jan; 45(2):228-47. PubMed ID: 19097774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessment of objective responses in thymic epithelial tumors using ITMIG modified criteria.
Kim HS; Lee JY; Lim SH; Sun JM; Lee SH; Ahn JS; Park K; Ahn MJ
Lung Cancer; 2016 Jun; 96():48-51. PubMed ID: 27133749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measuring response in solid tumors: comparison of RECIST and WHO response criteria.
Park JO; Lee SI; Song SY; Kim K; Kim WS; Jung CW; Park YS; Im YH; Kang WK; Lee MH; Lee KS; Park K
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2003 Oct; 33(10):533-7. PubMed ID: 14623923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Individual patient data analysis to assess modifications to the RECIST criteria.
Bogaerts J; Ford R; Sargent D; Schwartz LH; Rubinstein L; Lacombe D; Eisenhauer E; Verweij J; Therasse P;
Eur J Cancer; 2009 Jan; 45(2):248-60. PubMed ID: 19095437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A statistical simulation study finds discordance between WHO criteria and RECIST guideline.
Mazumdar M; Smith A; Schwartz LH
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Apr; 57(4):358-65. PubMed ID: 15135836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Measuring tumor response and shape change on CT: esophageal cancer as a paradigm.
Schwartz LH; Colville JA; Ginsberg MS; Wang L; Mazumdar M; Kalaigian J; Hricak H; Ilson D; Schwartz GK
Ann Oncol; 2006 Jun; 17(6):1018-23. PubMed ID: 16641170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of lung cancer response after nonoperative therapy: tumor diameter, bidimensional product, and volume. A serial CT scan-based study.
Werner-Wasik M; Xiao Y; Pequignot E; Curran WJ; Hauck W
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2001 Sep; 51(1):56-61. PubMed ID: 11516851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment.
Therasse P; Eisenhauer EA; Verweij J
Eur J Cancer; 2006 May; 42(8):1031-9. PubMed ID: 16616487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Discrepancy in the assessment of tumor response in patients with pancreatic cancer: WHO versus RECIST criteria.
Ahn SH; Garewal HS; Dragovich T
J BUON; 2008; 13(3):359-62. PubMed ID: 18979550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors.
Wahl RL; Jacene H; Kasamon Y; Lodge MA
J Nucl Med; 2009 May; 50 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):122S-50S. PubMed ID: 19403881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Immune-Modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (imRECIST): Refining Guidelines to Assess the Clinical Benefit of Cancer Immunotherapy.
Hodi FS; Ballinger M; Lyons B; Soria JC; Nishino M; Tabernero J; Powles T; Smith D; Hoos A; McKenna C; Beyer U; Rhee I; Fine G; Winslow N; Chen DS; Wolchok JD
J Clin Oncol; 2018 Mar; 36(9):850-858. PubMed ID: 29341833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The minimum number of target lesions that need to be measured to be representative of the total number of target lesions (according to RECIST).
Darkeh MH; Suzuki C; Torkzad MR
Br J Radiol; 2009 Aug; 82(980):681-6. PubMed ID: 19366735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. RECIST 1.1 compared with RECIST 1.0 in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy.
Krajewski KM; Nishino M; Ramaiya NH; Choueiri TK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Mar; 204(3):W282-8. PubMed ID: 25714313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Tumor response assessment by the single-lesion measurement per organ in small cell lung cancer.
Jung SG; Kim JH; Kim HS; Kim KJ; Yang I
Chin J Cancer Res; 2016 Apr; 28(2):161-7. PubMed ID: 27199513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CT of colon cancer metastases to the liver using modified RECIST criteria: determining the ideal number of target lesions to measure.
Zacharia TT; Saini S; Halpern EF; Sumner JE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Apr; 186(4):1067-70. PubMed ID: 16554580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Inadequacy of the RECIST criteria for response evaluation in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.
van Klaveren RJ; Aerts JG; de Bruin H; Giaccone G; Manegold C; van Meerbeeck JP
Lung Cancer; 2004 Jan; 43(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 14698538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The time to progression ratio: a new individualized volumetric parameter for the early detection of clinical benefit of targeted therapies.
Cirkel GA; Weeber F; Bins S; Gadellaa-van Hooijdonk CG; van Werkhoven E; Willems SM; van Stralen M; Veldhuis WB; Ubink I; Steeghs N; de Jonge MJ; Langenberg MH; Schellens JH; Sleijfer S; Lolkema MP; Voest EE
Ann Oncol; 2016 Aug; 27(8):1638-43. PubMed ID: 27234642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Development of adapted RECIST criteria to assess response in lymphoma and their comparison to the International Workshop Criteria.
Assouline S; Meyer RM; Infante-Rivard C; Connors JM; Belch A; Crump M; Kouroukis CT; Eisenhauer E
Leuk Lymphoma; 2007 Mar; 48(3):513-20. PubMed ID: 17454591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [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]
[Next] [New Search]
