Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41744841›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2026

Challenges of Applying the RANO-BM Criteria for Characterization of Brain Metastases Treatment Response.

Tatiana Kashtanova, Naren Ramakrishna

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Tatiana KashtanovaDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-4964-7440
Naren RamakrishnaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Orlando Health Cancer Institute, Orlando, FL 32806, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7544-7083

Funding

Orlando Health Foundation N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of brain metastasis therapy is to reduce the risk of intracranial disease progression and to minimize treatment-related adverse effects and loss of neurologic function without compromising extracranial disease control. A response assessment system plays a critical role in the comparative evaluation of therapeutic strategies in clinical trials and in routine patient care. Since 2015, the RANO-BM criteria have become a standard schema for evaluating brain metastases treatment response, providing uniform definitions and methodology particularly practical in prospective clinical trials of systemic therapy. There have been a variety of modifications and additions to the original guidelines proposed to improve their utility for brain metastases response assessment, including lowering the measurable disease size threshold, optimizing disease progression metrics, and employing tumor volumetric analysis using automated measurement tools. However, despite these enhancements, the criteria display limitations in selected clinical scenarios. This article provides a detailed overview of these limitations and their corresponding clinical contexts and concludes with a discussion of approaches which may aid in the development of a more comprehensive brain metastases response assessment system.

Indexed as

brain metastasesRANO-BMresponse assessment

Identifiers

PMID41744841
PMCPMC12938896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.