Trial reportAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2024
Comparison of Volumetric and 2D Measurements and Longitudinal Trajectories in the Response Assessment of
Trial report in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01748149 (Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium (PNOC)-002: Safety, Phase 0, and Pilot Efficacy Study of Vemurafenib, an Oral Inhibitor of BRAFV600E, in Children and Young Adults With Recurrent/Refractory BRAFV600E- or BRAF Ins T Mutant Brain Tumors
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Matched MRI, Segmentations, and Histopathologic Images of Brain Metastases from Primary Lung Cancer.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2009-2025: Broad scope and implementation-A progress report.Neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- The use of minor response, volumetric assessment, and growth rate kinetics as endpoints in grade 1-3 glioma clinical trials: a RANO perspective.Neuro-oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeResponse on imaging is widely used to evaluate treatment efficacy in clinical trials of pediatric gliomas. While conventional criteria rely on 2D measurements, volumetric analysis may provide a more comprehensive response assessment. There is sparse research on the role of volumetrics in pediatric gliomas. Our purpose was to compare 2D and volumetric analysis with the assessment of neuroradiologists using the Brain Tumor Reporting and Data System (BT-RADS) in MATERIALS AND
methodsManual volumetric segmentations of whole and solid tumors were compared with 2D measurements in 31 participants (292 follow-up studies) in the Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium 002 trial (NCT01748149). Two neuroradiologists evaluated responses using BT-RADS. Receiver operating characteristic analysis compared classification performance of 2D and volumetrics for partial response. Agreement between volumetric and 2D mathematically modeled longitudinal trajectories for 25 participants was determined using the model-estimated time to best response.
resultsOf 31 participants, 20 had partial responses according to BT-RADS criteria. Receiver operating characteristic curves for the classification of partial responders at the time of first detection (median = 2 months) yielded an area under the curve of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.69-0.99) for 2D area, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80-1.00) for whole-volume, and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.82-1.00) for solid volume change. There was no significant difference in the area under the curve between 2D and solid (
conclusionsAlthough there was no overall difference between volumetrics and 2D in classifying partial response assessment using BT-RADS, further prospective studies will be critical to elucidate how the observed differences in tumor 2D and volumetric trajectories affect clinical decision-making and outcomes in some individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.