The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials
Open accessAbstract
Development of novel therapies for CNS tumors requires reliable assessment of response and progression. This requirement has been particularly challenging in neuro-oncology for which contrast enhancement serves as an imperfect surrogate for tumor volume and is influenced by agents that affect vascular permeability, such as antiangiogenic therapies. In addition, most tumors have a nonenhancing component that can be difficult to accurately quantify. To improve the response assessment in neuro-oncology and to standardize the criteria that are used for different CNS tumors, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) working group was established. This multidisciplinary international working group consists of neuro-oncologists, medical oncologists, neuroradiologists, neurosurgeons, radiation oncologists, neuropsychologists, and experts in clinical outcomes assessments, working in collaboration with government and industry to enhance the interpretation of clinical trials. The RANO working group was originally created to update response criteria for high- and low-grade gliomas and to address such issues as pseudoresponse and nonenhancing tumor progression from antiangiogenic therapies, and pseudoprogression from radiochemotherapy. RANO has expanded to include working groups that are focused on other tumors, including brain metastases, leptomeningeal metastases, spine tumors, pediatric brain tumors, and meningiomas, as well as other clinical trial end points, such as clinical outcomes assessments, seizures, corticosteroid use, and positron emission tomography imaging. In an effort to standardize the measurement of neurologic function for clinical assessment, the Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology scale was drafted. Born out of a workshop conducted by the Jumpstarting Brain Tumor Drug Development Coalition and the US Food and Drug Administration, a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol now exists to reduce variability and improve reliability. Efforts by RANO have been widely accepted and are increasingly being used in neuro-oncology trials, although additional refinements will be needed.
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
PD-1 and PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Blockade to Treat Breast Cancer
Hartkopf, A. D., Taran, F.-A., Wallwiener, M., Walter, C. B., Krämer, B., Grischke, E.-M., & Brucker, S. Y. (2016) · Breast Care · doi:10.1159/000453569 · Cited by 30,845
New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)
Eisenhauer, E. A., Therasse, P., Bogaerts, J., Schwartz, L. H., Sargent, D., Ford, R., Dancey, J., Arbuck, S., Gwyther, S., Mooney, M., et al. (2009) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 · Cited by 29,534
Ostrom, Q. T., Gittleman, H., Farah, P., Ondracek, A., Chen, Y., Wolinsky, Y., Stroup, N. E., Kruchko, C., & Barnholtz-Sloan, J. S. (2013) · Neuro-Oncology · doi:10.1093/neuonc/not151 · Cited by 11,994
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
Wen, P. Y., Macdonald, D. R., Reardon, D. A., Cloughesy, T. F., Sorensen, A. G., Galanis, E., DeGroot, J., Wick, W., Gilbert, M. R., Lassman, A. B., et al. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.26.3541 · Cited by 3,836
Self-citationWolchok, J. D., Hoos, A., O'Day, S., Weber, J. S., Hamid, O., Lebbé, C., Maio, M., Binder, M., Bohnsack, O., Nichol, G., et al. (2009) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-09-1624 · Cited by 3,222
Comprehensive, Integrative Genomic Analysis of Diffuse Lower-Grade Gliomas
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1402121 · Cited by 3,148
Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma.
Macdonald, D. R., Cascino, T. L., Schold, S. C., & Cairncross, J. G. (1990) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1990.8.7.1277 · Cited by 2,409
Self-citationOstrom, Q. T., Gittleman, H., Xu, J., Kromer, C., Wolinsky, Y., Kruchko, C., & Barnholtz-Sloan, J. S. (2016) · Neuro-Oncology · doi:10.1093/neuonc/now207 · Cited by 1,204
Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas
Brandsma, D., Stalpers, L., Taal, W., Sminia, P., & van den Bent, M. J. (2008) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(08)70125-6 · Cited by 1,121
Self-citation
Cited by
Wen, P. Y., Weller, M., Lee, E. Q., Alexander, B. M., Barnholtz-Sloan, J. S., Barthel, F. P., Batchelor, T. T., Bindra, R. S., Chang, S. M., Chiocca, E. A., et al. (2020) · Neuro-Oncology · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaa106 · Cited by 1,168
Self-citationPeng, T., Ma, X., Hua, W., Wang, C., Chu, Y., Sun, M., Fermi, V., Hamelmann, S., Lindner, K., Shao, C., et al. (2025) · Cell Stem Cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2025.01.002 · Cited by 86
Huang, J., Campian, J. L., DeWees, T. A., Skrott, Z., Mistrik, M., Johanns, T. M., Ansstas, G., Butt, O., Leuthardt, E., Dunn, G. P., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.05.009 · Cited by 34
Cho, J., Kim, Y. J., Sunwoo, L., Lee, G. P., Nguyen, T. Q., Cho, S. J., Baik, S. H., Bae, Y. J., Choi, B. S., Jung, C., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.739639 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Wen, P. Y., Chang, S. M., Van den Bent, M. J., Vogelbaum, M. A., Macdonald, D. R., & Lee, E. Q.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2017-07-20
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2439-2449
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2651525809
- Cited by
- 435
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 14.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2017.72.7511
- The paper
- Wen, P. Y., Chang, S. M., Van den Bent, M. J., Vogelbaum, M. A., Macdonald, D. R., & Lee, E. Q. (2017). Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2017.72.7511
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.
