Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 327

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A SYSTEM FOR THE CLINICAL STAGING OF LUNG CANCER

MOUNTAIN, CLIFTON F., CARR, DAVID T., ANDERSON, W. A. D.·1974·American Journal of Roentgenology

Abstract

S TAGING of neoplastic disease is the procedure of assigning a simple coded designator to a patient in accordance with an established set of rules. Its purpose is to classify patients and group them with respect to the anatomic extent or biologic severity of their disease. Clinical staging is based only on those measures of disease extent which are available from diagnostic or evaluative studies undertaken prior to instituting therapy. This classification of patients into relatively homogeneous groups, with respect to estimates of their prognosis, is essential if different modalities of treatment are to be compared and if results are to be communicated in meaningful terms. The central problems in designing a meaningful staging system are: (I) to identify and give proportionate weight to those factors which will reliably and validly predict survival; and (2) to develop rules which, when applied to these factors, will permit assignment of an index of disease extent. The essential character of such an index is that patients within any stagegroup who survive equivalent treatment will demonstrate a generally similar ageadjusted life expectancy. A major constraint on any system of classifying the extent of disease is that it must be easily understood and remembered; therefore, it must be based on relatively few predicting factors. Only a relatively uncomplicated system will lend itself to widespread utilization. Among the systems of classification proposed by international organizations and 8 10, 14, 17 and mdi viduals6 are classification schemes applicable speci f-icalby to lung cancer.”2 Some of these have been found wanting,5’9”3 and none have achieved wide acceptance to date. The TNM classification scheme, first proposed by Denoix,4 meets many of the criteria and constraints noted above, and its principles are well established internationally.’6 Therefore, the general rules of the TNM system were adopted in this investigation, undertaken under the auspices of the Task Force

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 · 10.2214/ajr.120.1.130

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.

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

Cited by

See all 327

Metadata

Authors
MOUNTAIN, C. F., CARR, D. T., & ANDERSON, W. A. D.
Venue
American Journal of Roentgenology
Published
1974-01
Volume
120
Issue
1
Pages
130-138
ISSN
  • 0002-9580 (ISSN-L)
  • 0361-803X
  • 1546-3141
OpenAlex
W1987187775
Cited by
327
References
0
FWCI
12.09
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: A SYSTEM FOR THE CLINICAL STAGING OF LUNG CANCER. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2214/ajr.120.1.130
The paper
MOUNTAIN, C. F., CARR, D. T., & ANDERSON, W. A. D. (1974). A SYSTEM FOR THE CLINICAL STAGING OF LUNG CANCER. American Journal of Roentgenology. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.120.1.130

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.