Transcription of New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised ...
{{id}} {{{paragraph}}}
New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version ) Eisenhauera,*, P. Therasseb, J. Bogaertsc, Schwartzd, D. Sargente, R. Fordf,J. Danceyg, S. Arbuckh, S. Gwytheri, M. Mooneyg, L. Rubinsteing, L. Shankarg, L. Doddg,R. Kaplanj, D. Lacombec, J. VerweijkaNational Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group, 10 Stuart Street, Queen s University, Kingston, ON, CanadabGlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, BelgiumcEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Data Centre, Brussels, BelgiumdMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USAeMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USAfRadPharm, Princeton, NJ, USAgDivision of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USAhSchering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ, USAiEast Surrey Hospital, Redhill, Surrey, UKjNational Cancer Research Network, Leeds, UKkErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The NetherlandsARTICLE INFOA rticle history:Received 17 October 2008 Accepted 29 October 2008 Keywords: response criteriaSolid tumoursGuidelinesABSTRACTB ackground.
MRI or CT or (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic (FDG-PET) techniques assessing tumour metab-olism). As can be seen, the Working Group and particularly those involved in imaging research, did not believe that there is at present sufficient standardisation and widespread avail-
Domain:
Source:
Link to this page:
Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:
{{id}} {{{paragraph}}}