Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40875521›Full record

ReviewCancer2025

The legend of the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors: A historical overview.

Illaa Smesseim, Kevin B W Groot Lipman, Ferry Lalezari, Jacobus A Burgers, Stefano Trebeschi

Abstract readReviewHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Improved early response assessment of chemoimmunotherapy efficacy byEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Illaa SmesseimDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0683-3804
Kevin B W Groot LipmanDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ferry LalezariDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jacobus A BurgersDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stefano TrebeschiDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

methodsIn this review, the historical development of tumor response criteria is examined and an interview was conducted with one of the original researchers behind the original study. This study, published nearly five decades ago, assessed tumor size through palpation and measurements of simulated tumor masses ("balls under mattresses"). The methodology used in that early study as well as in subsequent research that has influenced modifications of the current response evaluation criteria was critically evaluated.

resultsThe current tumor response criteria trace back to a 1976 study by Moertel and Hanley, which relied on palpation to measure tumor size. The key outcome, a 50% reduction in the product of the longest perpendicular diameters of the most measurable tumor mass, formed the basis for later criteria. The World Health Organization criteria adopted these thresholds for response and introduced a 25% increase as a cutoff for progression. Later, unidimensional measurements replaced two-dimensional ones, with adjusted thresholds accordingly. These criteria further inspired the development of specialized response criteria such as Choi, mRECIST, and PERCIST.

conclusionBy analyzing the evolution of RECIST, it is highlighted that these criteria are not fixed standards but rather the product of a series of pragmatic choices and compromises rooted in their historical context. With advances in technology, including artificial intelligence and volumetric imaging, it is timely to reassess the reliability of current criteria and explore new approaches to tumor response evaluation.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansTumor BurdencarcinomaChoiRECISTRECIST criteriaresponseWHO

Identifiers

PMID40875521
PMCPMC12393182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.