English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Accurately evaluating response in the treatment of high-grade gliomas presents considerable challenges. This review looks at the advancements made in response criteria while critically outlining remaining weaknesses, and directs our vision toward promising endpoints to come. The 2010 guidelines from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) working group have enhanced interpretation of clinical trials involving novel treatments for high-grade glioma. Yet, while the criteria are considered clinically applicable to high-grade glioma trials, as well as reasonably accurate and reproducible, RANO lacks sufficient detail for consistent implementation in certain aspects and leaves some issues from the original Macdonald guidelines unresolved. To provide the most accurate assessment of response to therapeutic intervention currently possible, it is essential that trial oncologists and radiologists not only have a solid understanding of RANO guidelines, but also proper insight into the inherent limitations of the criteria. With the expectation of improved data collection as a standard, the author anticipates that the next high-grade glioma response criteria updates will incorporate advanced MRI methods and quantitative tumor volume measurements, availing a more accurate interpretation of response in the future.

Standardized MRI assessment of high-grade glioma response: a review of the essential elements and pitfalls of the RANO criteria