The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of PET Before Liver Resection on Surgical Management for Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Patients with colorectal cancer with liver metastases undergo hepatic resection with curative intent. Positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET-CT) could help avoid noncurative surgery by identifying patients with occult metastases. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of preoperative PET-CT vs no PET-CT (control) on the surgical management of patients with resectable metastases and to investigate the effect of PET-CT on survival and the association between the standardized uptake value (ratio of tissue radioactivity to injected radioactivity adjusted by weight) and survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized trial of patients older than 18 years with colorectal cancer treated by surgery, with resectable metastases based on CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis within the previous 30 days, and with a clear colonoscopy within the previous 18 months was conducted between 2005 and 2013, involving 21 surgeons at 9 hospitals in Ontario, Canada, with PET-CT scanners at 5 academic institutions. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized using a 2 to 1 ratio to PET-CT or control. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a change in surgical management defined as canceled hepatic surgery, more extensive hepatic surgery, or additional organ surgery based on the PET-CT. Survival was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Of the 263 patients who underwent PET-CT, 21 had a change in surgical management (8.0%; 95% CI, 5.0%-11.9%). Specifically, 7 patients (2.7%) did not undergo laparotomy, 4 (1.5%) had more extensive hepatic surgery, 9 (3.4%) had additional organ surgery (8 of whom had hepatic resection), and the abdominal cavity was opened in 1 patient but hepatic surgery was not performed and the cavity was closed. Liver resection was performed in 91% of patients in the PET-CT group and 92% of the control group. After a median follow-up of 36 months, the estimated mortality rate was 11.13 (95% CI, 8.95-13.68) events/1000 person-months for the PET-CT group and 12.71 (95% CI, 9.40-16.80) events/1000 person-months for the control group. Survival did not differ between the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.60-1.21]; P = .38). The standardized uptake value was associated with survival (hazard ratio, 1.11 [90% CI, 1.07-1.15] per unit increase; P < .001). The C statistic for the model including the standardized uptake value was 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.68) and without it was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.44-0.56). The difference in C statistics is 0.12 (95% CI, 0.04-0.21). The low C statistic suggests that the standard uptake value is not a strong predictor of overall survival. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with potentially resectable hepatic metastases of colorectal adenocarcinoma, the use of PET-CT compared with CT alone did not result in frequent change in surgical management. These findings raise questions about the value of PET-CT scans in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00265356.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
Cited by
Hashiguchi, Y., Muro, K., Saito, Y., Ito, Y., Ajioka, Y., Hamaguchi, T., Hasegawa, K., Hotta, K., Ishida, H., Ishiguro, M., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1007/s10147-019-01485-z · Cited by 1,922
Adam, R., de Gramont, A., Figueras, J., Kokudo, N., Kunstlinger, F., Loyer, E., Poston, G., Rougier, P., Rubbia-Brandt, L., Sobrero, A., et al. (2015) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.06.006 · Cited by 607
Current Surgical Management Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases
Ivey, G. D., Johnston, F. M., Azad, N. S., Christenson, E. S., Lafaro, K. J., & Shubert, C. R. (2022) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers14041063 · Cited by 70
Current status of surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases
Xu, F., Tang, B., Jin, T.-Q., & Dai, C.-L. (2018) · World Journal of Clinical Cases · doi:10.12998/wjcc.v6.i14.716 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Moulton, C.-A., Gu, C.-S., Law, C. H., Tandan, V. R., Hart, R., Quan, D., Fairfull Smith, R. J., Jalink, D. W., Husien, M., Serrano, P. E., Hendler, A. L., Haider, M. A., Ruo, L., Gulenchyn, K. Y., Finch, T., Julian, J. A., Levine, M. N., & Gallinger, S.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2014-05-14
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 1863
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2141514833
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of PET Before Liver Resection on Surgical Management for Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2014.3740
- The paper
- Moulton, C.-A., Gu, C.-S., Law, C. H., Tandan, V. R., Hart, R., Quan, D., Fairfull Smith, R. J., Jalink, D. W., Husien, M., Serrano, P. E., Hendler, A. L., Haider, M. A., Ruo, L., Gulenchyn, K. Y., Finch, T., Julian, J. A., Levine, M. N., & Gallinger, S. (2014). Effect of PET Before Liver Resection on Surgical Management for Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.3740
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.