ReviewNeuro-oncology2025
Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2009-2025: Broad scope and implementation-A progress report.
Review in Neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient-reported outcomes as prognostic indicators for overall survival and progression-free survival in brain tumor patients - a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Radioligand therapy for primary brain tumors: a PRISMA-based systematic review of meningiomas and gliomas.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Multidisciplinary recommendations for routine follow-up of isocitrate dehydrogenase‑mutant glioma in 2026: Adapting clinical practice to the molecular era.Neuro-oncology practice · 2026Review
- Accelerating discovery: Transformative clinical trial models in neuro-oncology.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Review
- New and Emerging Therapies for Patients with Low-Grade Glioma.CNS drugs · 2026Review
- Imaging in Neuro-oncology.Seminars in neurology · 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
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since its first activities in 2008 and 2009, the Response Assessment in NeuroOncology (RANO) group has given guidance on response assessment, trial design, and trial procedures to improve and standardize the way clinical trials in neurooncological studies are performed. To achieve its objectives, a variety of working groups have been initiated that cover many aspects of clinical trial design and outcome assessment in patients with tumors affecting the Central Nervous System. The RANO working groups are built on expertise without a formal structure, which makes rapid responses to new developments possible. RANO is aiming at evidence-based guidelines and recommendations, but in the absence of evidence will provide consensus-based guidance achieved by inviting recognized international experts. In its 15 years of existence, more than 60 RANO papers have been published mostly in high-ranking journals, and its recommendations have been accepted by regulators and industry as guiding principles. RANO organizes two meetings per year, one in conjunction with the annual American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meeting, and one during the annual Society for Neuro-Oncology meeting. These meetings are open, as are the working groups of RANO. New initiatives are welcomed.
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.