AJDRAJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

Publication Preview: Published February 13, 2008

American Journal of Neuroradiology 2008;29:419.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
ajnr.A0963v1
29/3/419    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Henson, J.W.
Right arrow Articles by Harris, G.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Henson, J.W.
Right arrow Articles by Harris, G.J.

REVIEW ARTICLE

Brain Tumor Imaging in Clinical Trials

J.W. Henson, S. Ulmer and G.J. Harris

From the Stephen E. and Catherine Pappas Brain Tumor Imaging Research Program (J.W.H., S.U.), Division of Neuroradiology (J.W.H.), 3D Imaging Service (J.W.H., G.J.H.), Department of Radiology (J.W.H., G.J.H.), and Neurology Service (J.W.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass; and Harvard Medical School (J.W.H., G.J.H.), Boston, Mass.

Please address correspondence to John W. Henson, MD, Stephen E. and Catherine Pappas Brain Tumor Imaging Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St, Yawkey Nine East, Boston, MA 02114; e-mail: henson{at}helix.mgh.harvard.edu

SUMMARY: There are substantial challenges in the radiologic evaluation of tumor size during clinical trials, and it is important for neuroradiologists to have a firm understanding of these issues. This review will examine measurement approaches, response criteria, selection of lesions for measurement, technical imaging considerations, interval between tumor measurements and response confirmation, and validity of imaging as a measure of efficacy.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JCOHome page
M. J. van den Bent, M. A. Vogelbaum, P. Y. Wen, D. R. Macdonald, and S. M. Chang
End Point Assessment in Gliomas: Novel Treatments Limit Usefulness of Classical Macdonald's Criteria
J. Clin. Oncol., June 20, 2009; 27(18): 2905 - 2908.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am Soc Clin Oncol Ed BookHome page
S. M. Chang, J. Clarke, and P. Wen
Novel Imaging Response Assessment for Drug Therapies in Recurrent Malignant Glioma
ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 107 - 111.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
E. S. Paulson and K. M. Schmainda
Comparison of Dynamic Susceptibility-weighted Contrast-enhanced MR Methods: Recommendations for Measuring Relative Cerebral Blood Volume in Brain Tumors
Radiology, November 1, 2008; 249(2): 601 - 613.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
A. Idbaih, F. Ducray, M. Sierra Del Rio, K. Hoang-Xuan, and J.-Y. Delattre
Therapeutic Application of Noncytotoxic Molecular Targeted Therapy in Gliomas: Growth Factor Receptors and Angiogenesis Inhibitors
Oncologist, September 1, 2008; 13(9): 978 - 992.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]