150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28987705)
1. Evaluation of inter-observer variability according to RECIST 1.1 and its influence on response classification in CT measurement of liver metastases.
Bellomi M; De Piano F; Ancona E; Lodigiani AF; Curigliano G; Raimondi S; Preda L
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Oct; 95():96-101. PubMed ID: 28987705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Are we reproducible in measurement of NET liver metastasis?
Moalla S; Arfi Rouche J; Foulon S; Caramella C; Ternes N; Planchard D; Goere D; Ducreux M; Scoazec JY; Deschamps F; Dromain C; Baudin E
Dig Liver Dis; 2017 Oct; 49(10):1121-1127. PubMed ID: 28844707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Semi-automatic software increases CT measurement accuracy but not response classification of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy.
van Kessel CS; van Leeuwen MS; Witteveen PO; Kwee TC; Verkooijen HM; van Hillegersberg R
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Oct; 81(10):2543-9. PubMed ID: 22264447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Retrospective comparison of approaches to evaluating inter-observer variability in CT tumour measurements in an academic health centre.
Woo M; Heo M; Devane AM; Lowe SC; Gimbel RW
BMJ Open; 2020 Nov; 10(11):e040096. PubMed ID: 33191265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimal Phase of Dynamic Computed Tomography for Reliable Size Measurement of Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Liver: Comparison between Pre- and Post-Contrast Phases.
Huh J; Park J; Kim KW; Kim HJ; Lee JS; Lee JH; Jeong YK; Shinagare AB; Ramaiya NH
Korean J Radiol; 2018; 19(6):1066-1076. PubMed ID: 30386138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Inter-observer variability of manual contour delineation of structures in CT.
Joskowicz L; Cohen D; Caplan N; Sosna J
Eur Radiol; 2019 Mar; 29(3):1391-1399. PubMed ID: 30194472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Observer variability in a phase II trial - assessing consistency in RECIST application.
Skougaard K; McCullagh MJ; Nielsen D; Hendel HW; Jensen BV; Johannesen HH
Acta Oncol; 2012 Jul; 51(6):774-80. PubMed ID: 22432439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of colorectal liver metastases using MRI and CT: impact of observer experience on diagnostic performance and inter-observer reproducibility with histopathological correlation.
Albrecht MH; Wichmann JL; Müller C; Schreckenbach T; Sakthibalan S; Hammerstingl R; Bechstein WO; Zangos S; Ackermann H; Vogl TJ
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Oct; 83(10):1752-8. PubMed ID: 25082480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Volumetric evaluation of therapy response in patients with lung metastases. Preliminary results with a computer system (CAD) and comparison with unidimensional measurements.
Fraioli F; Bertoletti L; Napoli A; Calabrese FA; Masciangelo R; Cortesi E; Catalano C; Passariello R
Radiol Med; 2006 Apr; 111(3):365-75. PubMed ID: 16683084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Tumor growth kinetics versus RECIST to assess response to locoregional therapy in breast cancer liver metastases.
Seyal AR; Parekh K; Velichko YS; Salem R; Yaghmai V
Acad Radiol; 2014 Aug; 21(8):950-7. PubMed ID: 24833565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Only moderate intra- and inter-observer agreement between radiologists and surgeons when grading blunt paediatric hepatic injury on CT scan.
Nellensteijn DR; ten Duis HJ; Oldenziel J; Polak WG; Hulscher JB
Eur J Pediatr Surg; 2009 Dec; 19(6):392-4. PubMed ID: 19899038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Interobserver Variability in CT-based Morphologic Tumor Response Assessment of Colorectal Liver Metastases.
Wesdorp NJ; Kemna R; Bolhuis K; van Waesberghe JHTM; Nota IMGC; Struik F; Oulad Abdennabi I; Phoa SSKS; van Dieren S; van Amerongen MJ; Chapelle T; Dejong CHC; Engelbrecht MRW; Gerhards MF; Grünhagen D; van Gulik TM; Hermans JJ; de Jong KP; Klaase JM; Liem MSL; van Lienden KP; Molenaar IQ; Patijn GA; Rijken AM; Ruers TM; Verhoef C; de Wilt JHW; Swijnenburg RJ; Punt CJA; Huiskens J; Stoker J; Kazemier G;
Radiol Imaging Cancer; 2022 May; 4(3):e210105. PubMed ID: 35522139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Size determination and response assessment of liver metastases with computed tomography--comparison of RECIST and volumetric algorithms.
Rothe JH; Grieser C; Lehmkuhl L; Schnapauff D; Fernandez CP; Maurer MH; Mussler A; Hamm B; Denecke T; Steffen IG
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Nov; 82(11):1831-9. PubMed ID: 22717124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Computed Tomography Assessment of Hepatic Metastases of Breast Cancer with Revised Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Criteria (Version 1.1): Inter-Observer Agreement.
Ghobrial FEI; Eldin MS; Razek AAKA; Atwan NI; Shamaa SSA
Pol J Radiol; 2017; 82():593-597. PubMed ID: 29657622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Volume-based response evaluation with consensual lesion selection: a pilot study by using cloud solutions and comparison to RECIST 1.1.
Oubel E; Bonnard E; Sueoka-Aragane N; Kobayashi N; Charbonnier C; Yamamichi J; Mizobe H; Kimura S
Acad Radiol; 2015 Feb; 22(2):217-25. PubMed ID: 25488429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Surrogate Imaging Biomarkers of Response of Colorectal Liver Metastases After Salvage Radioembolization Using 90Y-Loaded Resin Microspheres.
Shady W; Sotirchos VS; Do RK; Pandit-Taskar N; Carrasquillo JA; Gonen M; Sofocleous CT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Sep; 207(3):661-70. PubMed ID: 27384594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The Attenuation Distribution Across the Long Axis of Breast Cancer Liver Metastases at CT: A Quantitative Biomarker for Predicting Overall Survival.
Abramson RG; Lakomkin N; Hainline A; Kang H; Hutson MS; Arteaga CL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jan; 210(1):W1-W7. PubMed ID: 29064750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of Volumetric versus Manual Measurement in Disseminated Testicular Cancer; No Difference in Assessment between Non-Radiologists and Genitourinary Radiologist.
Öztürk Ç; Velleman T; Bongaerts AH; Bergman LM; van Ginkel RJ; Gietema JA; Hoekstra HJ
PLoS One; 2017; 12(1):e0168977. PubMed ID: 28081195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Intra- and inter-observer variability in measurement of target lesions: implication on response evaluation according to RECIST 1.1.
Muenzel D; Engels HP; Bruegel M; Kehl V; Rummeny EJ; Metz S
Radiol Oncol; 2012 Mar; 46(1):8-18. PubMed ID: 22933974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
