Response assessment in high-grade glioma: tumor volume as endpoint.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Efficacy Endpoint Standardization in Adult Primary CNS Tumor Trials: Integrating Regulatory Science and Clinical Perspectives in the RANO 2.0 Era.Cancers · 2026
   Review
2. Deep learning-based automatic tumor burden assessment of pediatric high-grade gliomas, medulloblastomas, and other leptomeningeal seeding tumors.Neuro-oncology · 2022
   Article
3. Tumor Volume Dynamics as an Early Biomarker for Patient-Specific Evolution of Resistance and Progression in Recurrent High-Grade Glioma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020
   Article
4. Differentiation of residual/recurrent gliomas from postradiation necrosis with arterial spin labeling and diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging-derived metrics.Neuroradiology · 2018
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Comparison of 2D (RANO) and volumetric methods for assessment of recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab-a report from the BELOB trial.2017

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as