The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring Response in Solid Tumors: Unidimensional Versus Bidimensional Measurement
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumor shrinkage is a common end point used in screening new cytotoxic agents. The standard World Health Organization criterion for partial response is a 50% or more decrease in the sum of the products of two measurements (the maximum diameter of a tumor and the largest diameter perpendicular to this maximum diameter) of individual tumors. However, theoretically, the simple sum of the maximum diameters of individual tumors is more linearly related to cell kill than is the sum of the bidimensional products. It has been hypothesized that the calculation of bidimensional products is unnecessary, and a 30% decrease in the sum of maximum diameters of individual tumors (assuming spherical shape and equivalence to a 50% reduction in the sum of the bidimensional products) was proposed as a new criterion. We have applied the standard response and the new response criteria to the same data to determine whether the same number of responses in the same patients would result. METHODS: Data from 569 patients included in eight studies of a variety of cancers were reanalyzed. The two response criteria were separately applied, and the results were compared using the kappa statistic. The importance of confirmatory measurements and the frequency of nonspherical tumors were also examined. In addition, for a subset of 128 patients, a unidimensional criterion for disease progression (30% increase in the sum of maximum diameters) was applied and compared with the standard definition of a 25% increase in the sum of the bidimensional products. RESULTS: Agreement between the unidimensional and bidimensional criteria was generally found to be good. The kappa statistic for concordance for overall response was 0.95. CONCLUSION: We conclude that one dimensional measurement of tumor maximum diameter may be sufficient to assess change in solid tumors.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
Oken, M. M., Creech, R. H., Tormey, D. C., Horton, J., Davis, T. E., McFadden, E. T., & Carbone, P. P. (1982) · AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY · doi:10.1097/00000421-198212000-00014 · Cited by 11,647
Reporting results of cancer treatment
Miller, A. B., Hoogstraten, B., Staquet, M., & Winkler, A. (1981) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19810101)47:1<207::aid-cncr2820470134>3.0.co;2-6 · Cited by 7,793
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Cooper, T. (1976) · Military Medicine · doi:10.1093/milmed/141.8.521 · Cited by 3,993
Observations on growth rates of human tumors.
Collins, V. P., Loeffler, R. K., & Tivey, H. (1956) · PubMed · Cited by 758
Assessment of response to therapy in advanced breast cancer
Hayward, J. L., Carbone, P. P., Heusen, J. C., Kumaoka, S., Segaloff, A., & Rubens, R. D. (1977) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.1977.42 · Cited by 705
Warr, D. G., McKinney, S., & Tannock, I. F. (1984) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1984.2.9.1040 · Cited by 151
Case for using only maximum diameter in measuring tumors.
Gurland, J., & JOHNSON, R. O. (1966) · PubMed · Cited by 21
Cited by
New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid Tumors
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L., Verweij, J., Van Glabbeke, M., van Oosterom, A. T., Christian, M. C., et al. (2000) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205 · Cited by 15,660
Self-citationImproved Survival with Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma
Hodi, F. S., O'Day, S. J., McDermott, D. F., Weber, R. W., Sosman, J. A., Haanen, J. B., Gonzalez, R., Robert, C., Schadendorf, D., Hassel, J. C., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1003466 · Cited by 15,155
Paclitaxel–Carboplatin Alone or with Bevacizumab for Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Sandler, A., Gray, R., Perry, M. C., Brahmer, J., Schiller, J. H., Dowlati, A., Lilenbaum, R., & Johnson, D. H. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa061884 · Cited by 5,761
Pre-metastatic niches: organ-specific homes for metastases
Peinado, H., Zhang, H., Matei, I. R., Costa-Silva, B., Hoshino, A., Rodrigues, G., Psaila, B., Kaplan, R. N., Bromberg, J. F., Kang, Y., et al. (2017) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc.2017.6 · Cited by 1,889
Sirolimus for Angiomyolipoma in Tuberous Sclerosis Complex or Lymphangioleiomyomatosis
Bissler, J. J., McCormack, F. X., Young, L. R., Elwing, J. M., Chuck, G., Leonard, J. M., Schmithorst, V. J., Laor, T., Brody, A. S., Bean, J., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa063564 · Cited by 1,253
Metadata
- Authors
- James, K., Eisenhauer, E., Christian, M., Terenziani, M., Vena, D., Muldal, A., & Therasse, P.
- Venue
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-03-17
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 523-528
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2107907914
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 9.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring Response in Solid Tumors: Unidimensional Versus Bidimensional Measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/91.6.523
- The paper
- James, K., Eisenhauer, E., Christian, M., Terenziani, M., Vena, D., Muldal, A., & Therasse, P. (1999). Measuring Response in Solid Tumors: Unidimensional Versus Bidimensional Measurement. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/91.6.523
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.