Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 471

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

Lymph Node Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Carcinoma of the Cervix

Grigsby, Perry W., Siegel, Barry A., Dehdashti, Farrokh·2001·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the results of computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) with [18 F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG) for lymph node staging in patients with carcinoma of the cervix and to evaluate the relationship of the imaging findings to prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the results of CT lymph node staging and whole-body FDG-PET in 101 consecutive patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Patients were treated with standard irradiation and chemotherapy (as clinically indicated) and observed at 3-month intervals for a median of 15.4 months (range, 2.5 to 30 months). Progression-free survival was evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: CT demonstrated abnormally enlarged pelvic lymph nodes in 20 (20%) and para-aortic lymph nodes in seven (7%) of the 101 patients. PET demonstrated abnormal FDG uptake in pelvic lymph nodes in 67 (67%), in para-aortic lymph nodes in 21 (21%), and in supraclavicular lymph node in eight (8%). The 2-year progression-free survival, based solely on para-aortic lymph node status, was 64% in CT-negative and PET-negative patients, 18% in CT-negative and PET-positive patients, and 14% in CT-positive and PET-positive patients (P < .0001). A multivariate analysis demonstrated that the most significant prognostic factor for progression-free survival was the presence of positive para-aortic lymph nodes as detected by PET imaging (P = .025). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that FDG-PET detects abnormal lymph node regions more often than does CT and that the findings on PET are a better predictor of survival than those of CT in patients with carcinoma of the cervix.

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.2001.19.17.3745

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

Metadata

Authors
Grigsby, P. W., Siegel, B. A., & Dehdashti, F.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2001-09-01
Volume
19
Issue
17
Pages
3745-3749
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1755258021
Cited by
471
References
1
FWCI
32.39
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 Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Carcinoma of the Cervix. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2001.19.17.3745
The paper
Grigsby, P. W., Siegel, B. A., & Dehdashti, F. (2001). Lymph Node Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Carcinoma of the Cervix. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2001.19.17.3745

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.