Literature DB >> 23536031

[Imaging in oncology: terms and definitions].

P Brader1, Y Menu, S Kreuzer, S Polanec, M Mayerhoefer, C J Herold.   

Abstract

Oncologic imaging includes the morphological description of the primary tumor region for an accurate classification of the tumor and lymph node stage and whether distant metastases have occurred according to the TNM staging system. Knowing the stage of the disease helps to plan the treatment and to estimate the prognosis. In clinical routine this is accomplished by conventional imaging techniques, such as ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Additionally, oncologic imaging is essential in treatment monitoring to visualize and quantify the effect of cancer therapy according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) and World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. The tremendous development in oncology and technical innovations in imaging represent a particular challenge for radiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23536031     DOI: 10.1007/s00117-012-2431-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiologe        ISSN: 0033-832X            Impact factor:   0.635


  11 in total

1.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Molecular imaging for personalized cancer care.

Authors:  Moritz F Kircher; Hedvig Hricak; Steven M Larson
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 6.603

3.  Oncologic imaging: a guiding hand of personalized cancer care.

Authors:  Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  The impact of 2D versus 3D quantitation of tumor bulk determination on current methods of assessing response to treatment.

Authors:  K D Hopper; C J Kasales; K D Eggli; T R TenHave; N M Belman; P S Potok; M A Van Slyke; G J Olt; P Close; A Lipton; H A Harvey; J S Hartzel
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1996 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.826

5.  The effect of measuring error on the results of therapeutic trials in advanced cancer.

Authors:  C G Moertel; J A Hanley
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  We should desist using RECIST, at least in GIST.

Authors:  Robert S Benjamin; Haesun Choi; Homer A Macapinlac; Michael A Burgess; Shreyaskumar R Patel; Lei L Chen; Donald A Podoloff; Chuslip Charnsangavej
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-05-01       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points.

Authors:  D J Sargent; L Rubinstein; L Schwartz; J E Dancey; C Gatsonis; L E Dodd; L K Shankar
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

Authors:  E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 9.162

9.  Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1.

Authors:  L H Schwartz; J Bogaerts; R Ford; L Shankar; P Therasse; S Gwyther; E A Eisenhauer
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  Comparison of local versus central tumor measurements in a multicenter cancer trial.

Authors:  W G Henderson; L R Zacharski; P K Spiegel; F R Rickles; W B Forman; C J Cornell; R J Forcier; R L Edwards; E Headley; S H Kim
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 2.339

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.