Literature DB >> 20231676

Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group.

Patrick Y Wen1, David R Macdonald, David A Reardon, Timothy F Cloughesy, A Gregory Sorensen, Evanthia Galanis, John Degroot, Wolfgang Wick, Mark R Gilbert, Andrew B Lassman, Christina Tsien, Tom Mikkelsen, Eric T Wong, Marc C Chamberlain, Roger Stupp, Kathleen R Lamborn, Michael A Vogelbaum, Martin J van den Bent, Susan M Chang.   

Abstract

Currently, the most widely used criteria for assessing response to therapy in high-grade gliomas are based on two-dimensional tumor measurements on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in conjunction with clinical assessment and corticosteroid dose (the Macdonald Criteria). It is increasingly apparent that there are significant limitations to these criteria, which only address the contrast-enhancing component of the tumor. For example, chemoradiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastomas results in transient increase in tumor enhancement (pseudoprogression) in 20% to 30% of patients, which is difficult to differentiate from true tumor progression. Antiangiogenic agents produce high radiographic response rates, as defined by a rapid decrease in contrast enhancement on CT/MRI that occurs within days of initiation of treatment and that is partly a result of reduced vascular permeability to contrast agents rather than a true antitumor effect. In addition, a subset of patients treated with antiangiogenic agents develop tumor recurrence characterized by an increase in the nonenhancing component depicted on T2-weighted/fluid-attenuated inversion recovery sequences. The recognition that contrast enhancement is nonspecific and may not always be a true surrogate of tumor response and the need to account for the nonenhancing component of the tumor mandate that new criteria be developed and validated to permit accurate assessment of the efficacy of novel therapies. The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group is an international effort to develop new standardized response criteria for clinical trials in brain tumors. In this proposal, we present the recommendations for updated response criteria for high-grade gliomas.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20231676     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3541

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  1428 in total

1.  Re-irradiation for recurrent glioma: outcome evaluation, toxicity and prognostic factors assessment. A multicenter study of the Radiation Oncology Italian Association (AIRO).

Authors:  Pierina Navarria; Giuseppe Minniti; Elena Clerici; Stefano Tomatis; Valentina Pinzi; Patrizia Ciammella; Marco Galaverni; Dante Amelio; Daniele Scartoni; Silvia Scoccianti; Marco Krengli; Laura Masini; Lorena Draghini; Ernesto Maranzano; Valentina Borzillo; Paolo Muto; Fabio Ferrarese; Laura Fariselli; Lorenzo Livi; Francesco Pasqualetti; Alba Fiorentino; Filippo Alongi; Michela Buglione di Monale; Stefano Magrini; Marta Scorsetti
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 4.130

2.  Loss of Pericytes in Radiation Necrosis after Glioblastoma Treatments.

Authors:  Soon-Tae Lee; Youngbeom Seo; Ji-Yeon Bae; Kon Chu; Jin Wook Kim; Seung Hong Choi; Tae Min Kim; Il Han Kim; Sung-Hye Park; Chul-Kee Park
Journal:  Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 5.590

3.  Stripe-like increase of rCBV beyond the visible border of glioblastomas: site of tumor infiltration growing after neurosurgery.

Authors:  Stella Blasel; Kea Franz; Hanns Ackermann; Stefan Weidauer; Friedhelm Zanella; Elke Hattingen
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2010-10-07       Impact factor: 4.130

4.  Identifying Voxels at Risk for Progression in Glioblastoma Based on Dosimetry, Physiologic and Metabolic MRI.

Authors:  Mekhail Anwar; Annette M Molinaro; Olivier Morin; Susan M Chang; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Sarah J Nelson; Janine M Lupo
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 5.  Treatment-related changes in glioblastoma: a review on the controversies in response assessment criteria and the concepts of true progression, pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse and radionecrosis.

Authors:  P D Delgado-López; E Riñones-Mena; E M Corrales-García
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 6.  An Update on the Approach to the Imaging of Brain Tumors.

Authors:  Katherine M Mullen; Raymond Y Huang
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.081

7.  Association of matrix metalloproteinase 2 plasma level with response and survival in patients treated with bevacizumab for recurrent high-grade glioma.

Authors:  Emeline Tabouret; Françoise Boudouresque; Maryline Barrie; Mona Matta; Celine Boucard; Anderson Loundou; Antoine Carpentier; Marc Sanson; Philippe Metellus; Dominique Figarella-Branger; L'houcine Ouafik; Olivier Chinot
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 12.300

8.  Recurrent glioblastomas in the elderly after maximal first-line treatment: does preserved overall condition warrant a maximal second-line treatment?

Authors:  Marc Zanello; Alexandre Roux; Renata Ursu; Sophie Peeters; Luc Bauchet; Georges Noel; Jacques Guyotat; Pierre-Jean Le Reste; Thierry Faillot; Fabien Litre; Nicolas Desse; Evelyne Emery; Antoine Petit; Johann Peltier; Jimmy Voirin; François Caire; Jean-Luc Barat; Jean-Rodolphe Vignes; Philippe Menei; Olivier Langlois; Edouard Dezamis; Antoine Carpentier; Phong Dam Hieu; Philippe Metellus; Johan Pallud
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  Establishing percent resection and residual volume thresholds affecting survival and recurrence for patients with newly diagnosed intracranial glioblastoma.

Authors:  Kaisorn L Chaichana; Ignacio Jusue-Torres; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Shaan M Raza; Maria Pascual-Gallego; Aly Ibrahim; Marta Hernandez-Hermann; Luis Gomez; Xiaobu Ye; Jon D Weingart; Alessandro Olivi; Jaishri Blakeley; Gary L Gallia; Michael Lim; Henry Brem; Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 12.300

10.  Codeletions at 1p and 19q predict a lower risk of pseudoprogression in oligodendrogliomas and mixed oligoastrocytomas.

Authors:  Andrew L Lin; Jingxia Liu; John Evans; Eric C Leuthardt; Keith M Rich; Ralph G Dacey; Joshua L Dowling; Albert H Kim; Gregory J Zipfel; Robert L Grubb; Jiayi Huang; Clifford G Robinson; Joseph R Simpson; Gerald P Linette; Michael R Chicoine; David D Tran
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 12.300

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.