Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Prospective Evaluation of18F-FDG and11C-Acetate PET/CT for Detection of Primary and Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Open access
Park, Joong-Won, Kim, Ji Hoon, Kim, Seok Ki, Kang, Keon Wook, Park, Kyung Woo, Choi, Jun-Il, Lee, Woo Jin, Kim, Chang-Min, Nam, Byung Ho·2008·Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Because (18)F-FDG PET has insufficient sensitivity for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), (11)C-acetate PET has been proposed as another technique for this use. We prospectively evaluated the value of PET/CT using these 2 tracers for the detection of primary and metastatic HCC. METHODS: One hundred twelve patients (99 with HCC, 13 with cholangiocellular carcinoma) underwent biopsy and (18)F-FDG and (11)C-acetate PET/CT. RESULTS: The overall sensitivities of (18)F-FDG, (11)C-acetate, and dual-tracer PET/CT in the detection of 110 lesions in 90 patients with primary HCC were 60.9%, 75.4%, and 82.7%, respectively. Elevated serum alpha-fetoprotein levels, an advanced tumor stage, portal vein tumor thrombosis, large tumors, and multiple tumors were significantly associated with positive (18)F-FDG PET/CT results. Uptake of (11)C-acetate was associated with large and multiple tumors. For (18)F-FDG, the sensitivities according to tumor size (1-2, 2-5, and >/=5 cm) were 27.2%, 47.8%, and 92.8%, respectively; for (11)C-acetate, these respective values were 31.8%, 78.2%, and 95.2%. (18)F-FDG was more sensitive in the detection of poorly differentiated HCC. Overall survival was lower in patients with (18)F-FDG PET/CT positive for all indexed lesions than in those with FDG negative or partially positive through the entire follow-up period. In analysis based on biopsied lesions, the sensitivity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT was 64.4% for primary HCC and 84.4% for (11)C-acetate PET/CT. The overall sensitivities of (18)F-FDG, (11)C-acetate, and dual-tracer PET/CT for 35 metastatic HCCs were 85.7%, 77.0%, and 85.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity of tracers according to metastatic tumor size, location, or differentiation. CONCLUSION: The addition of (11)C-acetate to (18)F-FDG PET/CT increases the overall sensitivity for the detection of primary HCC but not for the detection of extrahepatic metastases. (18)F-FDG, (11)C-acetate, and dual-tracer PET/CT have a low sensitivity for the detection of small primary HCC, but (18)F-FDG PET/CT has a relatively high sensitivity for the detection of extrahepatic metastases of HCC.

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 · 10.2967/jnumed.108.055087

Cites

17 of 17 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 17 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Park, J.-W., Kim, J. H., Kim, S. K., Kang, K. W., Park, K. W., Choi, J.-I., Lee, W. J., Kim, C.-M., & Nam, B. H.
Venue
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Published
2008-11-07
Volume
49
Issue
12
Pages
1912-1921
ISSN
  • 0161-5505 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-662X
OpenAlex
W2140475100
Cited by
287
References
17
FWCI
10.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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 Prospective Evaluation of18F-FDG and11C-Acetate PET/CT for Detection of Primary and Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2967/jnumed.108.055087
The paper
Park, J.-W., Kim, J. H., Kim, S. K., Kang, K. W., Park, K. W., Choi, J.-I., Lee, W. J., Kim, C.-M., & Nam, B. H. (2008). A Prospective Evaluation of18F-FDG and11C-Acetate PET/CT for Detection of Primary and Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.055087

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.