Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
RANO 2.0 criteria: concepts applicable to the neuroradiologist's clinical practice.
Sanvito, Francesco; Castellano, Antonella; Cloughesy, Timothy F; Wen, Patrick Y; Ellingson, Benjamin M.
Affiliation
  • Sanvito F; UCLA Brain Tumor Imaging Laboratory (BTIL), Center for Computer Vision and Imaging Biomarkers, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
  • Castellano A; Neuroradiology Unit and CERMAC, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele and Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
  • Cloughesy TF; UCLA Brain Tumor Program, Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
  • Wen PY; Center For Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Ellingson BM; UCLA Brain Tumor Imaging Laboratory (BTIL), Center for Computer Vision and Imaging Biomarkers, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Curr Opin Oncol ; 36(6): 536-544, 2024 Nov 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39011735
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) 2.0 criteria aim at improving the standardization and reliability of treatment response assessment in clinical trials studying central nervous system (CNS) gliomas. This review presents the evidence supporting RANO 2.0 updates and discusses which concepts can be applicable to the clinical practice, particularly in the clinical radiographic reads. RECENT

FINDINGS:

Updates in RANO 2.0 were supported by recent retrospective analyses of multicenter data from recent clinical trials. As proposed in RANO 2.0, in tumors receiving radiation therapy, the post-RT MRI scan should be used as a reference baseline for the following scans, as opposed to the pre-RT scan, and radiographic findings suggesting progression within three months after radiation therapy completion should be verified with confirmatory scans. Volumetric assessments should be considered, when available, especially for low-grade gliomas, and the evaluation of nonenhancing disease should have a marginal role in glioblastoma. However, the radiographic reads in the clinical setting also benefit from aspects that lie outside RANO 2.0 criteria, such as qualitative evaluations, patient-specific clinical considerations, and advanced imaging.

SUMMARY:

While RANO 2.0 criteria are meant for the standardization of the response assessment in clinical trials, some concepts have the potential to improve patients' management in the clinical practice.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Brain Neoplasms Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Curr Opin Oncol Journal subject: NEOPLASIAS Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Estados Unidos

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Brain Neoplasms Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Curr Opin Oncol Journal subject: NEOPLASIAS Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Estados Unidos