The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Detection with Integrated FDG PET/CT
Abstract
PURPOSE: To prospectively determine the accuracy of combination positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) in lymph node staging in patients with early-stage cervical cancer, with histopathologic results as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was institutional review board approved, and all patients gave informed consent. Forty-seven consecutive women aged 29-71 years with clinical stage IA or IB cervical carcinoma were included in the study. All 47 patients were scheduled for radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection. Before surgery, all patients underwent fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT. PET/CT findings were interpreted by two readers in consensus and then compared with histopathologic results. At histopathologic examination, the dissected lymph nodes were classified as nonmetastatic or metastatic. RESULTS: Fifteen (32%) patients had metastatic lymph nodes at histopathologic examination, and 32 (68%) had no histopathologically confirmed nodal metastasis. Of the total 1081 lymph nodes histopathologically sampled, 18 were found to be positive for malignant cells. The overall node-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of PET/CT were 72% (13 of 18), 99.7% (1060 of 1063), 81% (13 of 16), 99.5% (1060 of 1065), and 99.3% (1073 of 1081), respectively. Corresponding values for PET/CT-based diagnosis of lymph nodes larger than 0.5 cm in diameter were 100% (13 of 13), 99.6% (675 of 678), 81% (13 of 16), 100% (675 of 675), and 99.6% (688 of 691), respectively. The overall patient-based sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of PET/CT were 73% (11 of 15), 97% (31 of 32), 92% (11 of 12), 89% (31 of 35), and 89% (42 of 47), respectively. CONCLUSION: PET/CT proved to be valuable for lymph node staging in patients with early-stage cervical cancer, with short-axis diameter greater than 0.5 cm being the size threshold for accurate depiction of metastatic nodes.
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
Choi, H. J., Ju, W., Myung, S. K., & Kim, Y. (2010) · Cancer Science · doi:10.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01532.x · Cited by 317
Wu, Z., Qin, Z., Huang, B., Guo, B., Hao, X., Wu, P., Zhao, B., Xie, J., & Li, S. (2020) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-17003/v1 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Sironi, S., Buda, A., Picchio, M., Perego, P., Moreni, R., Pellegrino, A., Colombo, M., Mangioni, C., Messa, C., & Fazio, F.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 238
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 272-279
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2086899696
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.63
- 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: Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Detection with Integrated FDG PET/CT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2381041799
- The paper
- Sironi, S., Buda, A., Picchio, M., Perego, P., Moreni, R., Pellegrino, A., Colombo, M., Mangioni, C., Messa, C., & Fazio, F. (2006). Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Detection with Integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2381041799
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.
