4.2 Review

Response Rates A Valuable Signal of Promising Activity?

Journal

CANCER JOURNAL
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages 361-365

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PPO.0b013e3181bd045f

Keywords

cancer; oncology; clinical trials; evaluations; response criteria; WHO; RECIST; phase II trials; phase III trials

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A main criterion to identify activity in phase II studies is the response rates achieved in a well-defined subset of patients. The response could be defined as a measure of turner shrinkage. For 30 years, metric methods have been used to assess this response. The World Health Organization was the first organization to propose a unified definition for response status. Over time, the latter evolved and 10 years ago an international consensus panel proposed the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria. Although these guidelines for response assessment have limitations and biases, they have nevertheless been proven useful and advantageous. This article reviews those criteria and describes their use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available