Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,665

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Role of Imaging in the Staging and Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group

Open access
Barrington, Sally F., Mikhaeel, N. George, Kostakoglu, Lale, Meignan, Michel, Hutchings, Martin, Müeller, Stefan P., Schwartz, Lawrence H., Zucca, Emanuele, Fisher, Richard I., Trotman, Judith, Hoekstra, Otto S., Hicks, Rodney J., O'Doherty, Michael J., Hustinx, Roland, Biggi, Alberto, Cheson, Bruce D.·2014·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Recent advances in imaging, use of prognostic indices, and molecular profiling techniques have the potential to improve disease characterization and outcomes in lymphoma. International trials are under way to test image-based response–adapted treatment guided by early interim positron emission tomography (PET) –computed tomography (CT). Progress in imaging is influencing trial design and affecting clinical practice. In particular, a five-point scale to grade response using PET-CT, which can be adapted to suit requirements for early- and late-response assessment with good interobserver agreement, is becoming widely used both in practice- and response-adapted trials. A workshop held at the 11th International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas (ICML) in 2011 concluded that revision to current staging and response criteria was timely. Methods: An imaging working group composed of representatives from major international cooperative groups was asked to review the literature, share knowledge about research in progress, and identify key areas for research pertaining to imaging and lymphoma. Results: A working paper was circulated for comment and presented at the Fourth International Workshop on PET in Lymphoma in Menton, France, and the 12th ICML in Lugano, Switzerland, to update the International Harmonisation Project guidance regarding PET. Recommendations were made to optimize the use of PET-CT in staging and response assessment of lymphoma, including qualitative and quantitative methods. Conclusion: This article comprises the consensus reached to update guidance on the use of PET-CT for staging and response assessment for [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose-avid lymphomas in clinical practice and late-phase trials.

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.2013.53.5229

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,665

Metadata

Authors
Barrington, S. F., Mikhaeel, N. G., Kostakoglu, L., Meignan, M., Hutchings, M., Müeller, S. P., Schwartz, L. H., Zucca, E., Fisher, R. I., Trotman, J., Hoekstra, O. S., Hicks, R. J., O'Doherty, M. J., Hustinx, R., Biggi, A., & Cheson, B. D.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2014-09-20
Volume
32
Issue
27
Pages
3048-3058
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2131900456
Cited by
1,665
References
3
FWCI
98.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Role of Imaging in the Staging and Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2013.53.5229
The paper
Barrington, S. F., Mikhaeel, N. G., Kostakoglu, L., Meignan, M., Hutchings, M., Müeller, S. P., Schwartz, L. H., Zucca, E., Fisher, R. I., Trotman, J., Hoekstra, O. S., Hicks, R. J., O'Doherty, M. J., Hustinx, R., Biggi, A., & Cheson, B. D. (2014). Role of Imaging in the Staging and Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.53.5229

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.