The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Application of Novel Response/Progression Measures for Surgically Delivered Therapies for Gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group is an international, multidisciplinary effort to develop new standardized response criteria for clinical trials in brain tumors. The RANO group identified knowledge gaps relating to the definitions of tumor response and progression after the use of surgical or surgically based treatments. OBJECTIVE: To outline a proposal for new response and progression criteria for the assessment of the effects of surgery and surgically delivered therapies for patients with gliomas. METHODS: The Surgery Working Group of RANO identified surgically related end-point evaluation problems that were not addressed in the original Macdonald criteria, performed an extensive literature review, and used a consensus-building process to develop recommendations for how to address these issues in the setting of clinical trials. RESULTS: Recommendations were formulated for surgically related issues, including imaging changes associated with surgical resection or surgically mediated adjuvant local therapies, the determination of progression in the setting where all enhancing tumor has been removed, and how new enhancement should be interpreted in the setting where local therapies that are known to produce nonspecific enhancement have been used. Additionally, the terminology used to describe the completeness of surgical resections has been recognized to be inconsistently applied to enhancing vs nonenhancing tumors, and a new set of descriptors is proposed. CONCLUSION: The RANO process is intended to produce end-point criteria for clinical trials that take into account the effects of prior and ongoing therapies. The RANO criteria will continue to evolve as new therapies and technologies are introduced into clinical trial and/or practice.
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
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
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-citationRole of extent of resection in the long-term outcome of low-grade hemispheric gliomas
Smith, J. S., Chang, E. F., Lamborn, K. R., Chang, S. M., Prados, M. D., Cha, S., Tihan, T., VandenBerg, S., McDermott, M. W., & Berger, M. S. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.13.9337 · Cited by 1,283
Self-citationOutcomes and Prognostic Factors in Recurrent Glioma Patients Enrolled Onto Phase II Clinical Trials
Wong, E. T., Hess, K. R., Gleason, M. J., Jaeckle, K. A., Kyritsis, A. P., Prados, M. D., Levin, V. A., & Yung, W. K. A. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2572 · Cited by 902
Karim, A. B. M. F., Maat, B., Hatlevoll, R., Menten, J., Rutten, E. H. J. M., Thomas, D. G. T., Mascarenhas, F., Horiot, J. C., Parvinen, L. M., van Reijn, M., et al. (1996) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/s0360-3016(96)00352-5 · Cited by 694 · cited 5×
“In the case of LGGs, it has been demonstrated that a surgeon’s intraoperative assessment of the completeness of resection is an unreliable measure compared with a postoperative MRI.40 Unlike the nonspecific enhancement issue discussed above associated with enhancing gliomas, any new contrast enhancement after surgery…”
BackgroundInfluentialMcGirt, M. J., Chaichana, K. L., Attenello, F. J., Weingart, J. D., Than, K., Burger, P. C., Olivi, A., Brem, H., & Quinoñes-Hinojosa, A. (2008) · Neurosurgery · doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000325729.41085.73 · Cited by 533
Mazzara, G. P., Velthuizen, R. P., Pearlman, J. L., Greenberg, H. M., & Wagner, H. (2004) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.01.026 · Cited by 216
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-citationMeningiomas: knowledge base, treatment outcomes, and uncertainties. A RANO review
Rogers, L., Barani, I., Chamberlain, M., Kaley, T. J., McDermott, M., Raizer, J., Schiff, D., Weber, D. C., Wen, P. Y., & Vogelbaum, M. A. (2015) · Journal of Neurosurgery · doi:10.3171/2014.7.jns131644 · Cited by 698
Self-citationResponse Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Clinical Trials
Wen, P. Y., Chang, S. M., Van den Bent, M. J., Vogelbaum, M. A., Macdonald, D. R., & Lee, E. Q. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2017.72.7511 · Cited by 435
Self-citationKarschnia, P., Young, J. S., Dono, A., Häni, L., Sciortino, T., Bruno, F., Juenger, S. T., Teske, N., Morshed, R. A., Haddad, A. F., et al. (2023) · Neuro-Oncology · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noac193 · Cited by 384
Self-citationMultiplexed Profiling of Single Extracellular Vesicles
Lee, K., Fraser, K., Ghaddar, B., Yang, K., Kim, E., Balaj, L., Chiocca, E. A., Breakefield, X. O., Lee, H., & Weissleder, R. (2018) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.7b07060 · Cited by 369
Metadata
- Authors
- Vogelbaum, M. A., Jost, S., Aghi, M. K., Heimberger, A. B., Sampson, J. H., Wen, P. Y., Macdonald, D. R., Van den Bent, M. J., & Chang, S. M.
- Venue
- Neurosurgery
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 234-244
- ISSN
- 0148-396X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2332430608
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 7.37
- 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: Application of Novel Response/Progression Measures for Surgically Delivered Therapies for Gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1227/neu.0b013e318223f5a7
- The paper
- Vogelbaum, M. A., Jost, S., Aghi, M. K., Heimberger, A. B., Sampson, J. H., Wen, P. Y., Macdonald, D. R., Van den Bent, M. J., & Chang, S. M. (2012). Application of Novel Response/Progression Measures for Surgically Delivered Therapies for Gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group. Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0b013e318223f5a7
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.
