Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 872

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Morphologic Predictors of Lymph Node Status in Rectal Cancer with Use of High-Spatial-Resolution MR Imaging with Histopathologic Comparison

Brown, Gina, Richards, Catherine J., Bourne, Michael W., Newcombe, Robert G., Radcliffe, Andrew G., Dallimore, Nicholas S., Williams, Geraint T.·2003·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate signal intensity and border characteristics of lymph nodes at high-spatial-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with rectal cancer and to compare these findings with size in prediction of nodal status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients who underwent total mesorectal excision of the rectum to determine if they had rectal carcinoma were studied with preoperative thin-section MR imaging. Lymph nodes were harvested from 42 transversely sectioned surgical specimens. The slice of each lymph node was carefully matched with its location on the corresponding MR images. Nodal size, border contour, and signal intensity on MR images were characterized and related to histologic involvement with metastases. Differences in sensitivity and specificity with border or signal intensity were calculated with CIs by using method 10 of Newcombe. RESULTS: Of the 437 nodes harvested, 102 were too small (<3 mm) to be depicted on MR images, and only two of these contained metastases. In 15 (68%) of 22 patients with nodal metastases, the size of normal or reactive nodes was equal to or greater than that of positive nodes in the same specimen. Fifty-one nodes were above the area imaged, and seven of these contained metastases. The diameter of benign and malignant nodes was similar; therefore, size was a poor predictor of nodal status. If a node was defined as suspicious because of an irregular border or mixed signal intensity, a superior accuracy was obtained and resulted in a sensitivity of 51 (85%) of 60 (95% CI: 74%, 92%) and a specificity of 216 (97%) of 221 (95% CI: 95%, 99%). CONCLUSION: Prediction of nodal involvement in rectal cancer with MR imaging is improved by using the border contour and signal intensity characteristics of lymph nodes instead of size criteria.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2272011747

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 872

Metadata

Authors
Brown, G., Richards, C. J., Bourne, M. W., Newcombe, R. G., Radcliffe, A. G., Dallimore, N. S., & Williams, G. T.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2003-05
Volume
227
Issue
2
Pages
371-377
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2155994495
Cited by
872
References
2
FWCI
8.17
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: Morphologic Predictors of Lymph Node Status in Rectal Cancer with Use of High-Spatial-Resolution MR Imaging with Histopathologic Comparison. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2272011747
The paper
Brown, G., Richards, C. J., Bourne, M. W., Newcombe, R. G., Radcliffe, A. G., Dallimore, N. S., & Williams, G. T. (2003). Morphologic Predictors of Lymph Node Status in Rectal Cancer with Use of High-Spatial-Resolution MR Imaging with Histopathologic Comparison. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2272011747

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.