Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver (RECICL) (2015 Revised version)

Hepatology Research

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 3-9

  Kudo, Masatoshi ^a   Ueshima, Kazuomi ^a   Kubo, Shoji ^a   Sakamoto, Michiie ^a   Tanaka, Masatoshi ^a   Ikai, Iwao ^a   Furuse, Junji ^a   Murakami, Takamichi ^a   Kadoya, Masumi ^a   Kokudo, Norihiro ^a  

^a KINKI UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan; Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; Response Evaluation Criteria in Cancer of the Liver; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors

Indexed keywords

GADOXETIC ACID;

ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMOEMBOLIZATION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CRITERION VARIABLE; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION; RESPONSE EVALUATION CRITERIA IN CANCER OF THE LIVER; TUMOR VOLUME; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 84959339484     PISSN: 13866346     EISSN: 1872034X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/hepr.12542     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. Response evaluation criteria in cancer of the liver. Kanzo 1994; 35 (2): 193-205. (in Japanese)
2. Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. Response evaluation criteria in cancer of the liver. Kanzo 2004; 45 (7): 380-5. (in Japanese)
3. Kudo M, Kubo S, Takayasu K et al. Liver cancer study group of Japan, response evaluation criteria in cancer of the liver (2009 revised version). Kanzo 2010; 51 (5): 261-6. (in Japanese)
4. Kudo M, Kubo S, Takayasu K, et al. Response evaluation criteria in cancer of the liver (RECICL) proposed by the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2009 revised version). Hepatol Res 2010 40(7): 686-92.
5. WHO. Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment.: Geneva, SwitzerlandWorld Health Organization Offset Publication, 1979.
6. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000 92(3): 205-16.
7. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009 45(2): 228-47.
8. Takayasu K, Arii S, Matsuo N, et al. Comparison of CT findings with resected specimens after chemoembolization with iodized oil for hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000 175(3): 699-704.
9. Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2010 30(1): 52-60.
10. Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. General Rules for the Clinical and Pathological Study of Primary Liver Cancer, 6th revised edn. Tokyo: Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan, Kanehara & Co., 2015. (in Japanese)