RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment.

[1]  S. Larson,et al.  The Progress and Promise of Molecular Imaging Probes in Oncologic Drug Development , 2005, Clinical Cancer Research.

[2]  D. Goldstein,et al.  Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: Correlation of 18F-FDG Gamma Camera-Based Coincidence Positron Emission Tomography with CT for the Assessment of Treatment Response – An AGITG Study , 2005, Oncology.

[3]  P. Therasse,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton enables objective measurement of tumor response on prostate cancer bone metastases , 2005, The Prostate.

[4]  P. Hohenberger,et al.  Follow-up of gastro-intestinal stromal tumours (GIST) during treatment with imatinib mesylate by abdominal MRI , 2005, European Radiology.

[5]  L. Schwartz,et al.  Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial End Points: “RECIST”ing a Step Backwards , 2005, Clinical Cancer Research.

[6]  J. García-Foncillas,et al.  Assessment of the value of confirming responses in clinical trials in oncology. , 2005, European journal of cancer.

[7]  M. van Glabbeke,et al.  RECIST vs. WHO: prospective comparison of response criteria in an EORTC phase II clinical trial investigating ET-743 in advanced soft tissue sarcoma. , 2005, European journal of cancer.

[8]  A. Nowak.  CT, RECIST, and malignant pleural mesothelioma. , 2005, Lung cancer.

[9]  K. Griffith,et al.  FDG PET but not RECIST agrees with histologic response of soft tissue sarcoma to neoadjuvant chemotherapy , 2005 .

[10]  M. Ahn,et al.  Comparison of RECIST and WHO response criteria in metastatic colorectal carcinoma , 2005 .

[11]  S. Yoshida,et al.  Clinical impact of criteria for complete response (CR) of primary site to treatment of esophageal cancer. , 2005, Japanese journal of clinical oncology.

[12]  K. McHugh,et al.  Advances in paediatric tumour imaging , 2005, Archives of Disease in Childhood.

[13]  Bruce D Cheson,et al.  Progress and Promise of FDG-PET Imaging for Cancer Patient Management and Oncologic Drug Development , 2005, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  L. Schwartz,et al.  A theoretical approach to choosing the minimum number of multiple tumors required for assessing treatment response. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  Richard C. Pais,et al.  Comparison of treatment response classifications between unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric measurements of metastatic lung lesions on chest computed tomography. , 2004, Academic radiology.

[16]  Eric P Tamm,et al.  CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  J. Hilden,et al.  Should CA-125 response criteria be preferred to response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) for prognostication during second-line chemotherapy of ovarian carcinoma? , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  R. Heelan.  Staging and response to therapy of malignant pleural mesothelioma. , 2004, Lung cancer.

[19]  M. Bazzocchi,et al.  Tumor measurements on computed tomographic images of non-small cell lung cancer were similar among cancer professionals from different specialties. , 2004, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  B. Escudier,et al.  Different measurement criteria give different tumor response classifications in patients with metastatic renal cancer (MRCC) , 2004 .

[21]  P. Wen,et al.  Comparison of 1D, 2D, 3D and volumetric parameters in measuring tumor response in high-grade gliomas in adults. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  K. Mori,et al.  The impact of an independent response evaluation committee (REC) using RECIST guidelines in a Four-Arm Cooperative Study (FACS) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Japan. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  Naoto T Ueno,et al.  Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[24]  E. Eisenhauer,et al.  RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) applied to response in lymphoma , 2004 .

[25]  I. Hyodo,et al.  A phase II study of single-agent docetaxel in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. , 2004, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[26]  J E Husband,et al.  Evaluation of the response to treatment of solid tumours – a consensus statement of the International Cancer Imaging Society , 2004, British Journal of Cancer.

[27]  M. Bellomi,et al.  Evaluation of the response to therapy of neoplastic lesions. , 2004, La Radiologia medica.

[28]  Lawrence H Schwartz,et al.  A statistical simulation study finds discordance between WHO criteria and RECIST guideline. , 2004, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[29]  J. Dickson,et al.  Prediction of clinical outcome in treated neuroendocrine tumours of carcinoid type using functional volumes on 111In-pentetreotide SPECT imaging , 2004, Nuclear medicine communications.

[30]  M. Byrne,et al.  Modified RECIST criteria for assessment of response in malignant pleural mesothelioma. , 2004, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[31]  P. Hohenberger,et al.  Molecular response of gastrointestinal stromal tumour after treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib mesylate , 2004, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[32]  K. Sugimura,et al.  Tumor response to chemotherapy: The validity and reproducibility of RECIST guidelines in NSCLC patients 1 , 2003, Cancer Science.

[33]  L. Schwartz,et al.  Response assessment classification in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated on clinical trials , 2003, Cancer.

[34]  Wendy Brown,et al.  Variability in response assessment in solid tumors: effect of number of lesions chosen for measurement. , 2003, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[35]  Young Suk Park,et al.  Measuring response in solid tumors: comparison of RECIST and WHO response criteria. , 2003, Japanese journal of clinical oncology.

[36]  J Nuyts,et al.  18FDG-Positron emission tomography for the early prediction of response in advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with imatinib mesylate (Glivec). , 2003, European journal of cancer.

[37]  L. Broemeling,et al.  Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[38]  K. McHugh,et al.  Response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST): problems and need for modifications in paediatric oncology? , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[39]  Giles W Boland,et al.  Radiological Measurement of Breast Cancer Metastases to Lung and Liver: Comparison Between WHO (Bidimensional) and RECIST (Unidimensional) Guidelines , 2003, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[40]  C. Lombard-Bohas,et al.  Assessment of tumour response to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: accuracy of the RECIST criteria. , 2002, The British journal of radiology.

[41]  J. García-Foncillas,et al.  Comparison of unidimensional and bidimensional measurements in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer , 2002, British Journal of Cancer.

[42]  M. Kimura,et al.  Outstanding problems with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in breast cancer , 2002, Breast cancer.

[43]  A. Padhani,et al.  The RECIST criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologists , 2001 .

[44]  P S Albert,et al.  Comparison of one-, two-, and three-dimensional measurements of childhood brain tumors. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[45]  M Werner-Wasik,et al.  Assessment of lung cancer response after nonoperative therapy: tumor diameter, bidimensional product, and volume. A serial CT scan-based study. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[46]  S. Yoshida,et al.  Significance of and problems in adopting response evaluation criteria in solid tumor RECIST for assessing anticancer effects of advanced gastric cancer , 2000, Gastric Cancer.

[47]  R. Reznek,et al.  CT assessment of tumour response to treatment: comparison of linear, cross-sectional and volumetric measures of tumour size. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[48]  A R Padhani,et al.  Commentary. Are current tumour response criteria relevant for the 21st century? , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[49]  M. van Glabbeke,et al.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[50]  J. Armitage,et al.  Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[51]  Stephanie Green,et al.  Southwest Oncology Group standard response criteria, endpoint definitions and toxicity criteria , 1992, Investigational New Drugs.

[52]  Haesun Choi.  Critical issues in response evaluation on computed tomography: Lessons from the gastrointestinal stromal tumor model , 2005, Current oncology reports.

[53]  A. Ardizzoni,et al.  Inadequacy of the new Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: report of four cases. , 2004, Lung cancer.

[54]  R. V. van Klaveren,et al.  Inadequacy of the RECIST criteria for response evaluation in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. , 2004, Lung cancer.

[55]  A. Musk,et al.  Cisplatin and gemcitabine treatment for malignant mesothelioma: a phase II study. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[56]  M. van Glabbeke,et al.  Selection of large and objectively measurable target lesions in EORTC phase II trials: impact on recruitment and response rate. EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG). , 1993, European journal of cancer.

[57]  A. Miller,et al.  Reporting results of cancer treatment , 1981, Cancer.