Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 701

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

Prediction of Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy in Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagogastric Junction by Metabolic Imaging

Weber, Wolfgang A., Ott, Katja, Becker, Karen, Dittler, Hans-Joachim, Helmberger, Hermann, Avril, Norbert E., Meisetschläger, Günther, Busch, Raymonde, Siewert, Jörg-Rüdiger, Schwaiger, Markus, Fink, Ulrich·2001·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with gastroesophageal cancer is hampered by the lack of reliable predictors of tumor response. This study evaluates whether positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) may predict response early in the course of therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients with locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction were studied by FDG-PET at baseline and 14 days after initiation of cisplatin-based polychemotherapy. Clinical response (reduction of tumor length and wall thickness by > 50%) was evaluated after 3 months of therapy using endoscopy and standard imaging techniques. Patients with potentially resectable tumors underwent surgery, and tumor regression was assessed histopathologically. RESULTS: The reduction of tumor FDG uptake (mean ± 1 SD) after 14 days of therapy was significantly different between responding (−54% ± 17%) and nonresponding tumors (−15% ± 21%). Optimal differentiation was achieved by a cutoff value of 35% reduction of initial FDG uptake. Applying this cutoff value as a criterion for a metabolic response predicted clinical response with a sensitivity and specificity of 93% (14 of 15 patients) and 95% (21 of 22), respectively. Histopathologically complete or subtotal tumor regression was achieved in 53% (eight of 15) of the patients with a metabolic response but only in 5% (one of 22) of the patients without a metabolic response. Patients without a metabolic response were also characterized by significantly shorter time to progression/recurrence (P = .01) and shorter overall survival (P = .04). CONCLUSION: PET imaging may differentiate responding and nonresponding tumors early in the course of therapy. By avoiding ineffective and potentially harmful treatment, this may markedly facilitate the use of preoperative therapy, especially in patients with potentially resectable tumors.

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.2001.19.12.3058

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 701

Metadata

Authors
Weber, W. A., Ott, K., Becker, K., Dittler, H.-J., Helmberger, H., Avril, N. E., Meisetschläger, G., Busch, R., Siewert, J.-R., Schwaiger, M., & Fink, U.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2001-06-15
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
3058-3065
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1858406656
Cited by
701
References
2
FWCI
23.44
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: Prediction of Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy in Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagogastric Junction by Metabolic Imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2001.19.12.3058
The paper
Weber, W. A., Ott, K., Becker, K., Dittler, H.-J., Helmberger, H., Avril, N. E., Meisetschläger, G., Busch, R., Siewert, J.-R., Schwaiger, M., & Fink, U. (2001). Prediction of Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy in Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagogastric Junction by Metabolic Imaging. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2001.19.12.3058

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.