Literature DB >> 32823280

Response to Letter to Editor.

Timothy J Kaufmann1, Marion Smits2, Jerrold Boxerman3, Raymond Huang4, Daniel P Barboriak5, Michael Weller6, Caroline Chung7, Christina Tsien8, Paul D Brown9, Lalitha Shankar10, Evanthia Galanis11, Elizabeth Gerstner12, Martin J van den Bent13, Terry C Burns14, Ian F Parney14, Gavin Dunn15, Priscilla K Brastianos16, Nancy U Lin17, Patrick Y Wen18, Benjamin M Ellingson19,20.   

Abstract

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32823280      PMCID: PMC7690353          DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noaa202

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuro Oncol        ISSN: 1522-8517            Impact factor:   12.300


× No keyword cloud information.
  6 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of the utility of 1.5 versus 3 Tesla magnetic resonance brain imaging in clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Joanna M Wardlaw; Will Brindle; Ana M Casado; Kirsten Shuler; Moira Henderson; Brenda Thomas; Jennifer Macfarlane; Susana Muñoz Maniega; Katherine Lymer; Zoe Morris; Cyril Pernet; William Nailon; Trevor Ahearn; Abdul Nashirudeen Mumuni; Carlos Mugruza; John McLean; Goultchira Chakirova; Yuehui Terry Tao; Johanna Simpson; Andrew C Stanfield; Harriet Johnston; Jehill Parikh; Natalie A Royle; Janet De Wilde; Mark E Bastin; Nick Weir; Andrew Farrall; Maria C Valdes Hernandez
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Response assessment criteria for brain metastases: proposal from the RANO group.

Authors:  Nancy U Lin; Eudocia Q Lee; Hidefumi Aoyama; Igor J Barani; Daniel P Barboriak; Brigitta G Baumert; Martin Bendszus; Paul D Brown; D Ross Camidge; Susan M Chang; Janet Dancey; Elisabeth G E de Vries; Laurie E Gaspar; Gordon J Harris; F Stephen Hodi; Steven N Kalkanis; Mark E Linskey; David R Macdonald; Kim Margolin; Minesh P Mehta; David Schiff; Riccardo Soffietti; John H Suh; Martin J van den Bent; Michael A Vogelbaum; Patrick Y Wen
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 41.316

3.  Magnetic resonance imaging contrast enhancement of brain tumors at 3 tesla versus 1.5 tesla.

Authors:  Iris-Melanie Nöbauer-Huhmann; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Vladimir Mlynarik; Markus Barth; Alexander Schöggl; Karl Heimberger; Christian Matula; Amura Fog; Alexandra Kaider; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.016

4.  Consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol for clinical trials in brain metastases.

Authors:  Timothy J Kaufmann; Marion Smits; Jerrold Boxerman; Raymond Huang; Daniel P Barboriak; Michael Weller; Caroline Chung; Christina Tsien; Paul D Brown; Lalitha Shankar; Evanthia Galanis; Elizabeth Gerstner; Martin J van den Bent; Terry C Burns; Ian F Parney; Gavin Dunn; Priscilla K Brastianos; Nancy U Lin; Patrick Y Wen; Benjamin M Ellingson
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 12.300

5.  Effect of contrast dose and field strength in the magnetic resonance detection of brain metastases.

Authors:  Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Iris M Nöbauer-Huhmann; Katja Pinker; Nadja Schibany; Rupert Prokesch; Sheida Mehrain; Vladimir Mlynárik; Amura Fog; Karl Heimberger; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 6.016

6.  Consensus recommendations for a dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI protocol for use in high-grade gliomas.

Authors:  Jerrold L Boxerman; Chad C Quarles; Leland S Hu; Bradley J Erickson; Elizabeth R Gerstner; Marion Smits; Timothy J Kaufmann; Daniel P Barboriak; Raymond H Huang; Wolfgang Wick; Michael Weller; Evanthia Galanis; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Lalitha Shankar; Paula Jacobs; Caroline Chung; Martin J van den Bent; Susan Chang; W K Al Yung; Timothy F Cloughesy; Patrick Y Wen; Mark R Gilbert; Bruce R Rosen; Benjamin M Ellingson; Kathleen M Schmainda
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 12.300

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.