The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pitfalls in the Neuroimaging of Glioblastoma in the Era of Antiangiogenic and Immuno/Targeted Therapy – Detecting Illusive Disease, Defining Response
Open accessAbstract
Glioblastoma, the most common malignant primary brain tumor in adults is a devastating diagnosis with an average survival of 14-16 months using the current standard of care treatment. The determination of treatment response and clinical decision making is based on the accuracy of radiographic assessment. Notwithstanding, challenges exist in the neuroimaging evaluation of patients undergoing treatment for malignant glioma. Differentiating treatment response from tumor progression is problematic and currently combines long-term follow-up using standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with clinical status and corticosteroid-dependency assessments. In the clinical trial setting, treatment with gene therapy, vaccines, immunotherapy, and targeted biologicals similarly produces MRI changes mimicking disease progression. A neuroimaging method to clearly distinguish between pseudoprogression and tumor progression has unfortunately not been found to date. With the incorporation of antiangiogenic therapies, a further pitfall in imaging interpretation is pseudoresponse. The Macdonald criteria that correlate tumor burden with contrast-enhanced imaging proved insufficient and misleading in the context of rapid blood-brain barrier normalization following antiangiogenic treatment that is not accompanied by expected survival benefit. Even improved criteria, such as the RANO criteria, which incorporate non-enhancing disease, clinical status, and need for corticosteroid use, fall short of definitively distinguishing tumor progression, pseudoresponse, and pseudoprogression. This review focuses on advanced imaging techniques including perfusion MRI, diffusion MRI, MR spectroscopy, and new positron emission tomography imaging tracers. The relevant image analysis algorithms and interpretation methods of these promising techniques are discussed in the context of determining response and progression during treatment of glioblastoma both in the standard of care and in clinical trial context.
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
Sipuleucel-T Immunotherapy for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Kantoff, P. W., Higano, C. S., Shore, N. D., Berger, E. R., Small, E. J., Penson, D. F., Redfern, C. H., Ferrari, A. C., Dreicer, R., Sims, R. B., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1001294 · Cited by 5,572
Normalization of Tumor Vasculature: An Emerging Concept in Antiangiogenic Therapy
Jain, R. K. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1104819 · Cited by 5,527 · cited 1×
“These observations support the theory of “vascular normalization” as the mechanism of action (167), and a “vascular normalization index” (VNI) combining Ktrans and circulating collagen IV were subsequently proposed as a marker to predict survival (165).”
MethodThe Somatic Genomic Landscape of Glioblastoma
Brennan, C. W., Verhaak, R. G. W., McKenna, A., Campos, B., Noushmehr, H., Salama, S. R., Zheng, S., Chakravarty, D., Sanborn, J. Z., Berman, S. H., et al. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.09.034 · Cited by 5,016
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
(1992) · PubMed Central · doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.251744a · Cited by 1,172
Batchelor, T. T., Duda, D. G., di Tomaso, E., Ancukiewicz, M., Plotkin, S. R., Gerstner, E., Eichler, A. F., Drappatz, J., Hochberg, F. H., Benner, T., et al. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.26.3988 · Cited by 520
Self-citation
Cited by
Immunotherapy response assessment in neuro-oncology: a report of the RANO working group
Okada, H., Weller, M., Huang, R., Finocchiaro, G., Gilbert, M. R., Wick, W., Ellingson, B. M., Hashimoto, N., Pollack, I. F., Brandes, A. A., et al. (2015) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00088-1 · Cited by 781
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
Elshafeey, N., Kotrotsou, A., Hassan, A., Elshafei, N., Hassan, I., Ahmed, S., Abrol, S., Agarwal, A., El Salek, K., Bergamaschi, S., et al. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11007-0 · Cited by 147
Sonni, I., Garibotto, V., Iagaru, A., Das, D., & Massoud, T. (2018) · PET/MRI in Oncology · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-68517-5_11 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, R. Y., Neagu, M. R., Reardon, D. A., & Wen, P. Y.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Neurology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2015-02-23
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 33-33
- ISSN
- 1664-2295 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2079015646
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 11.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Pitfalls in the Neuroimaging of Glioblastoma in the Era of Antiangiogenic and Immuno/Targeted Therapy – Detecting Illusive Disease, Defining Response. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fneur.2015.00033
- The paper
- Huang, R. Y., Neagu, M. R., Reardon, D. A., & Wen, P. Y. (2015). Pitfalls in the Neuroimaging of Glioblastoma in the Era of Antiangiogenic and Immuno/Targeted Therapy – Detecting Illusive Disease, Defining Response. Frontiers in Neurology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2015.00033
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.