Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 242

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Additional Value of Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography With Fluorine-18-2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose in Recurrent Colorectal Cancer

Flamen, Patrick, Stroobants, Sigrid, Van Cutsem, Eric, Dupont, Patrick, Bormans, Guy, De Vadder, Nancy, Penninckx, Freddy, Van Hoe, Lieven, Mortelmans, Luc·1999·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the additional value of the whole-body [18 F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scan as a staging modality complementing conventional diagnostic methods (CDM) in patients suspected of having recurrent colorectal adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 103 patients, the discordances between FDG-PET and CDM results were identified and related to the final diagnosis obtained by histopathology or clinical follow-up (> 1 year). All FDG-PET studies were reviewed with full knowledge of the CDM findings. RESULTS: In a region-based analysis, discordances between CDM and FDG-PET findings were found in 40 of 412 regions (10%). In these, FDG-PET had additional diagnostic value in 14 of 16 locoregional, six of seven hepatic, seven of eight abdominal, and eight of nine extra-abdominal regions. In a patient-based analysis, CDM categorized a subgroup of 60 patients as having resectable recurrent disease limited to the liver (n = 37) or locoregional region (n = 23). In 13 of these patients, there were discordant FDG-PET findings, detecting additional tumor sites in nine patients and excluding disease in three patients and yielding an additional diagnostic value in 20% of the patients. A second subgroup consisted of 13 patients with inconclusive CDM findings (n = 5) or with elevated plasma carcinoembryonic antigen levels and an otherwise negative conventional work-up (n = 8). In these patients, FDG-PET results were correct in eight of nine discordances, yielding a positive additional diagnostic value in 62% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Whole-body FDG-PET can have a clear impact on the therapeutic management in the follow-up of patients with colorectal 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.1999.17.3.894

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 242

Metadata

Authors
Flamen, P., Stroobants, S., Van Cutsem, E., Dupont, P., Bormans, G., De Vadder, N., Penninckx, F., Van Hoe, L., & Mortelmans, L.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1999-03
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
894-894
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2112149632
Cited by
242
References
1
FWCI
23.09
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: Additional Value of Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography With Fluorine-18-2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose in Recurrent Colorectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1999.17.3.894
The paper
Flamen, P., Stroobants, S., Van Cutsem, E., Dupont, P., Bormans, G., De Vadder, N., Penninckx, F., Van Hoe, L., & Mortelmans, L. (1999). Additional Value of Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography With Fluorine-18-2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose in Recurrent Colorectal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1999.17.3.894

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.