The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Staging of Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Integrated Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: We compared the diagnostic accuracy of integrated positron-emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) with that of CT alone, that of PET alone, and that of conventional visual correlation of PET and CT in determining the stage of disease in non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: In a prospective study, integrated PET-CT was performed in 50 patients with proven or suspected non-small-cell lung cancer. CT and PET alone, visually correlated PET and CT, and integrated PET-CT were evaluated separately, and a tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage was assigned on the basis of image analysis. Nodal stations were identified according to the mapping system of the American Thoracic Society. The standard of reference was histopathological assessment of tumor stage and node stage. Extrathoracic metastases were confirmed histopathologically or by at least one other imaging method. A paired sign test was used to compare integrated PET-CT with the other imaging methods. RESULTS: Integrated PET-CT provided additional information in 20 of 49 patients (41 percent), beyond that provided by conventional visual correlation of PET and CT. Integrated PET-CT had better diagnostic accuracy than the other imaging methods. Tumor staging was significantly more accurate with integrated PET-CT than with CT alone (P=0.001), PET alone (P<0.001), or visual correlation of PET and CT (P=0.013); node staging was also significantly more accurate with integrated PET-CT than with PET alone (P=0.013). In metastasis staging, integrated PET-CT increased the diagnostic certainty in two of eight patients. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated PET-CT improves the diagnostic accuracy of the staging of non-small-cell lung cancer.
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
Cited by
Antoch, G., Saoudi, N., Kuehl, H., Dahmen, G., Mueller, S. P., Beyer, T., Bockisch, A., Debatin, J. F., & Freudenberg, L. S. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2004.08.120 · Cited by 435
Blodgett, T. M., Meltzer, C. C., & Townsend, D. W. (2007) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2422051113 · Cited by 387
Metabolic positron emission tomography imaging in cancer detection and therapy response
Zhu, A., Lee, D., & Shim, H. (2011) · Seminars in Oncology · doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2010.11.012 · Cited by 368
Splenic Metabolic Activity Predicts Risk of Future Cardiovascular Events
Emami, H., Singh, P., MacNabb, M., Vucic, E., Lavender, Z., Rudd, J. H. F., Fayad, Z. A., Lehrer-Graiwer, J., Korsgren, M., Figueroa, A. L., et al. (2015) · JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging · doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.10.009 · Cited by 264
(2004) · PubMed · Cited by 211
Metadata
- Authors
- Lardinois, D., Weder, W., Hany, T. F., Kamel, E. M., Korom, S., Seifert, B., von Schulthess, G. K., & Steinert, H. C.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2003-06-19
- Volume
- 348
- Issue
- 25
- Pages
- 2500-2507
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W1973870205
- Cited by
- 1,416
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 92.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Staging of Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Integrated Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa022136
- The paper
- Lardinois, D., Weder, W., Hany, T. F., Kamel, E. M., Korom, S., Seifert, B., von Schulthess, G. K., & Steinert, H. C. (2003). Staging of Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Integrated Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa022136
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.