Staging of Cervical Cancer: A Practical Approach Using MRI and FDG PET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review provides a practical approach to the imaging evaluation of patients with cervical cancer (CC), from initial diagnosis to restaging of recurrence, focusing on MRI and FDG PET. The primary updates to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) CC staging system, as well as these updates' relevance to clinical management, are discussed. The recent literature investigating the role of MRI and FDG PET in CC staging and image-guided brachytherapy is summarized. The utility of MRI and FDG PET in response assessment and posttreatment surveillance is described. Important findings on MRI and FDG PET that interpreting radiologists should recognize and report are illustrated. The essential elements of structured reports during various phases of CC management are outlined. Special considerations, including the role of imaging in patients desiring fertility-sparing management, differentiation of CC and endometrial cancer, and unusual CC histologies, are also described. Finally, future research directions including PET/MRI, novel PET tracers, and artificial intelligence applications are highlighted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".