PURPOSE: To reach a consensus on a set of optimal endpoint measurements for future external beam radiotherapy trials in bone metastases. METHODS: An International Bone Metastases Consensus Working Party invited principal investigators and individuals with a recognized interest in bone metastases to participate in the two surveys and a panel meeting on their preference of choice of optimal endpoints. RESULTS: Consensus has been reached on the following: (a) eligibility criteria for future trials; (b) pain and analgesic assessments; (c) radiation techniques; (d) follow-up and timing of assessments; (e) parameters at follow-up; (f) endpoints; (g) re-irradiation; and (h) statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available literature and the clinical experience of the working party members, an acceptable set of endpoints has been agreed upon for future clinical trials to promote consistency in reporting. It is intended that the consensus will be re-examined every 5 years. Areas of further research were identified.
PURPOSE: To reach a consensus on a set of optimal endpoint measurements for future external beam radiotherapy trials in bone metastases. METHODS: An International Bone Metastases Consensus Working Party invited principal investigators and individuals with a recognized interest in bone metastases to participate in the two surveys and a panel meeting on their preference of choice of optimal endpoints. RESULTS: Consensus has been reached on the following: (a) eligibility criteria for future trials; (b) pain and analgesic assessments; (c) radiation techniques; (d) follow-up and timing of assessments; (e) parameters at follow-up; (f) endpoints; (g) re-irradiation; and (h) statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available literature and the clinical experience of the working party members, an acceptable set of endpoints has been agreed upon for future clinical trials to promote consistency in reporting. It is intended that the consensus will be re-examined every 5 years. Areas of further research were identified.
Authors: Meagan Doyle; Elizabeth A Barnes; Emily Sinclair; Cyril Danjoux; Edward Chow Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2005-01-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Sanders Chang; Peter May; Nathan E Goldstein; Juan Wisnivesky; Kenneth Rosenzweig; R Sean Morrison; Kavita V Dharmarajan Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Srinivas Raman; Keyue Ding; Edward Chow; Ralph M Meyer; Yvette M van der Linden; Daniel Roos; William F Hartsell; Peter Hoskin; Jackson S Y Wu; Abdenour Nabid; Rick Haas; Ruud Wiggenraad; Scott Babington; William F Demas; Carolyn F Wilson; Rebecca K S Wong; Liting Zhu; Michael Brundage Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-11-29 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Paula R Williamson; Douglas G Altman; Heather Bagley; Karen L Barnes; Jane M Blazeby; Sara T Brookes; Mike Clarke; Elizabeth Gargon; Sarah Gorst; Nicola Harman; Jamie J Kirkham; Angus McNair; Cecilia A C Prinsen; Jochen Schmitt; Caroline B Terwee; Bridget Young Journal: Trials Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Michael Chan; Kristopher Dennis; Yuexi Huang; Charles Mougenot; Edward Chow; Carlo DeAngelis; Jennifer Coccagna; Arjun Sahgal; Kullervo Hynynen; Gregory Czarnota; William Chu Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-08-01
Authors: Edward Chow; Ralph M Meyer; Bingshu E Chen; Yvette M van der Linden; Daniel Roos; William F Hartsell; Peter Hoskin; Jackson S Y Wu; Abdenour Nabid; Caroline J A Tissing-Tan; Bing Oei; Scott Babington; William F Demas; Carolyn F Wilson; Rebecca K S Wong; Michael Brundage Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-10-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Frederick Mantel; Stefan Glatz; André Toussaint; Michael Flentje; Matthias Guckenberger Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-06-27 Impact factor: 3.621