The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Non-small cell lung cancer: nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) with 2-[fluorine-18] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) with that of computed tomography (CT) in the nodal staging of non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PET and contrast material-enhanced CT were performed in 47 patients suspected of having or with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer. Each imaging study was evaluated separately, and nodal stations were localized according to the American Thoracic Society mapping system. Extensive lymph node sampling (599 nodes from 191 nodal stations) of the ipsi- and contralateral tracheobronchial and mediastinal nodal stations was performed at thoracotomy and/or mediastinoscopy. Imaging findings were correlated with histopathologic staging results. RESULTS: The sensitivity of PET and CT was 89% and 57%, respectively, for the staging of N2 or N3 disease in mediastinal nodes; specificity was 99% and 94%, respectively; positive predictive value was 96% and 76%, respectively; negative predictive value was 97% and 87%, respectively; and accuracy was 96% and 85%, respectively. In assigning the correct N stage, PET was correct in 96% and CT in 79% of cases. CONCLUSION: PET with FDG appears to be superior to CT for nodal 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
(2001) · PubMed · Cited by 943
Staging Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Whole-Body PET
Marom, E. M., McAdams, H. P., Erasmus, J. J., Goodman, P. C., Culhane, D. K., Coleman, R. E., Herndon, J. E., & Patz, E. F. (1999) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.212.3.r99se21803 · Cited by 384
Stumpe, K. D. M., Urbinelli, M., Steinert, H. C., Glanzmann, C., Buck, A., & von Schulthess, G. K. (1998) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s002590050275 · Cited by 261
Self-citationZhao, S., Kuge, Y., Tsukamoto, E., Mochizuki, T., Kato, T., Hikosaka, K., Hosokawa, M., Kohanawa, M., & Tamaki, N. (2001) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1007/s002590100517 · Cited by 68
Metadata
- Authors
- Steinert, H. C., Hauser, M., Allemann, F., Engel, H., Berthold, T., von Schulthess, G. K., & Weder, W.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 1997-02
- Volume
- 202
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 441-446
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W1986317723
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.25
- 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: Non-small cell lung cancer: nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiology.202.2.9015071
- The paper
- Steinert, H. C., Hauser, M., Allemann, F., Engel, H., Berthold, T., von Schulthess, G. K., & Weder, W. (1997). Non-small cell lung cancer: nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.202.2.9015071
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.