<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Therasse, P.A.J.P.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/3230/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Response assessment in cancer clinical trials (Doctoral Thesis)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/7812/</link>
      <pubDate>2006-06-08T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Most anticancer agents developed over the last four  decades are cytotoxic drugs inducing tumor regression, sometimes also  resulting in prolongation of survival. Historically, the direct  therapeutic efficacy of such treatments has been monitored through  successive evaluations of the tumor burden quantified through the  measurement of the size of tumor lesions that were clinically or  radiologically evaluable.
By the end of the 1970’s, a group of breast cancer specialists, under  the auspices of International Union Against Cancer (UICC), set the  principles under which response to treatment in breast cancer should  be evaluated. This work was subsequently adopted and integrated into  the recommendations set by the World Health Organisation (WHO) for  the evaluation of cancer treatment in solid tumors.
After 1981, many new anticancer drugs have been developed, and many  researchers have also started to investigate different combinations  of treatments. The experience acquired over the years and the lack of  details in the WHO recommendations has stimulated the development of  modified versions of the WHO criteria. Over the years, the use of the  different versions of the original WHO criteria have rendered the  accuracy of the relative comparison of the results of investigations  based on the same therapy very unreliable. The evolution of cancer  imaging, the importance given to “response rate” as an endpoint of  early clinical trials and the rapidly increasing number of new  anticancer agents to be tested have also justified the initiative to  revisit, update the existing response criteria.  This thesis focuses  on the development and the implementation of a new set of response  criteria (RECIST).</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>