Dataset Information

Diagnostic Accuracy of PET for Differentiating True Glioma Progression From Post Treatment-Related Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of PET with different radiotracers and parameters in differentiating between true glioma progression (TPR) and post treatment-related change (PTRC). Methods: Studies on using PET to differentiate between TPR and PTRC were screened from the PubMed and Embase databases. By following the PRISMA checklist, the quality assessment of included studies was performed, the true positive and negative values (TP and TN), false positive and negative values (FP and FN), and general characteristics of all the included studies were extracted. Results of PET consistent with reference standard were defined as TP or TN. The pooled sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) were generated to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy. Results: The 33 included studies had 1,734 patients with 1,811 lesions suspected of glioma recurrence. Fifteen studies tested the accuracy of ¹⁸F-FET PET, 12 tested ¹⁸F-FDG PET, seven tested ¹¹C-MET PET, and three tested ¹⁸F-DOPA PET. ¹⁸F-FET PET showed a pooled Sen and Spe of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.93) and 0.78 (0.69, 0.85), respectively. In the subgroup analysis of FET-PET, diagnostic accuracy of high-grade gliomas (HGGs) was higher than that of mixed-grade gliomas (P _interaction = 0.04). ¹⁸F-FDG PET showed a pooled Sen and Spe of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.83) and 0.87 (0.80, 0.92), the Spe of the HGGs group was lower than that of the low-grade gliomas group (0.82 vs. 0.90, P = 0.02). ¹¹C-MET PET had a pooled Sen and Spe of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.96) and 0.78 (0.69, 0.86). ¹⁸F-DOPA PET had a pooled Sen and Spe of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.89) and 0.70 (0.60, 0.79). FET-PET combined with MRI had a pooled Sen and Spe of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.94) and 0.76 (0.57, 0.88). Multi-parameters analysis of FET-PET had pooled Sen and Spe values of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.92) and 0.79 (0.63, 0.89). Conclusion: PET has a moderate diagnostic accuracy in differentiating between TPR and PTRC. The high Sen of amino acid PET and high Spe of FDG-PET suggest that the combination of commonly used FET-PET and FDG-PET may be more accurate and promising, especially for low-grade glioma.

SUBMITTER: Cui M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8173157 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) stimulation test is the benchmark for diagnosing precocious puberty (PP). However, it is invasive, time-consuming, costly, and may create an unpleasant experience for participants. Moreover, some overlaps may occur between PP and premature thelarche (PT) in the early stage of PP. Female pelvic ultrasonography may provide additional information to help differentiate PP from PT and subsequently initiate early treatment. In this study, we aimed to first directly compare pelvic ultrasonography parameters between PP and PT groups and secondly, investigate their diagnostic accuracy compared with the GnRH stimulation test.MethodsA systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was performed up to March 31, 2021. All types of studies, except for case reports and review articles, were included. The GnRH stimulation test was used to confirm PP diagnosis. Those whose organic conditions might cause PP were excluded. The mean, standard deviation, sensitivity, and specificity of each parameter were documented. Forest plots were constructed to display the estimated standardized mean differences (SMDs) from each included study and the overall calculations. A bivariate model was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR).ResultsA total of 13 studies were included for analysis. The SMDs (95% confidence interval - CI) in ovarian volume, fundal-cervical ratio, uterine length, uterine cross-sectional area, and uterine volume between PP and PT groups were 1.12 (0.78-1.45; p < 0.01), 0.90 (0.07-1.73; p = 0.03), 1.38 (0.99-1.78; p < 0.01), 1.06 (0.61-1.50; p < 0.01), and 1.21 (0.84-1.58; p <0.01), respectively. A uterine length of 3.20 cm yielded a pooled sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI 78.3%-84.9%), specificity of 82.0% (95% CI 61.0%-93.0%), PLR of 4.56 (95% CI 2.15-9.69), NLR of 0.26 (95% CI 0.17-0.39), and DOR of 19.62 (95% CI 6.45-59.68). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.82.ConclusionFemale pelvic ultrasonography may serve as a complementary tool to the GnRH stimulation test in differentiating PP from PT.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021232427, ID: CRD42021232427.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Standard therapy for Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) involves maximal safe tumor resection followed with radiotherapy and concurrent adjuvant temozolomide. About 20 to 30% patients undergoing their first post-radiation MRI show increased contrast enhancement which eventually recovers without any new treatment. This phenomenon is referred to as pseudoprogression. Differentiating tumor progression from pseudoprogression is critical for determining tumor treatment, yet this capacity remains a challenge for conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Thus, a prospective diagnostic trial has been established that utilizes multimodal MRI techniques to detect tumor progression at its early stage. The purpose of this trial is to explore the potential role of intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging (IVIM-DWI) and three-dimensional arterial spin labeling imaging (3D-ASL) in differentiating true progression from pseudoprogression of GBM. In addition, the diagnostic performance of quantitative parameters obtained from IVIM-DWI and 3D-ASL, including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), slow diffusion coefficient (D), fast diffusion coefficient (D*), perfusion fraction (f), and cerebral blood flow (CBF), will be evaluated. METHODS:Patients that recently received a histopathological diagnosis of GBM at our hospital are eligible for enrollment. The patients selected will receive standard concurrent chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant temozolomide after surgery, and then will undergo conventional MRI, IVIM-DWI, 3D-ASL, and contrast-enhanced MRI. The quantitative parameters, ADC, D, D*, f, and CBF, will be estimated for newly developed enhanced lesions. Further comparisons will be made with unpaired t-tests to evaluate parameter performance in differentiating true progression from pseudoprogression, while receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses will determine the optimal thresholds, as well as sensitivity and specificity. Finally, relationships between these parameters will be assessed with Pearson's correlation and partial correlation analyses. DISCUSSION:The results of this study may demonstrate the potential value of using multimodal MRI techniques to differentiate true progression from pseudoprogression in its early stages to help decision making in early intervention and improve the prognosis of GBM. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02622620 ) on November 18, 2015 and published on March 28, 2016.

Project description:Background: We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating benign and malignant lesions in different body sites. Methods: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was performed using relevant keywords. Following data extraction, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CEUS, and SWE compared to histopathology as a reference standard. Statistical analyses were conducted by MetaDiSc (version 1.4) and R software (version 3.4.3). Results: One hundred and fourteen studies (15,926 patients) were pooled in the final analyses. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had significantly higher DOR than SWE (DOR = 27.14, 95%CI [2.30, 51.97]) in breast cancer detection. However, there were no significant differences between CEUS and SWE in hepatic (DOR = -6.67, 95%CI [-15.08, 1.74]) and thyroid cancer detection (DOR = 3.79, 95%CI [-3.10, 10.68]). Interestingly, ranking analysis showed that CEUS achieved higher DOR in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE achieved higher DOR in detecting hepatic cancer. The overall DOR for CEUS in detecting renal cancer was 53.44, 95%CI [29.89, 95.56] with an AUROC of 0.95, while the overall DOR for SWE in detecting prostate cancer was 25.35, 95%CI [7.15, 89.89] with an AUROC of 0.89. Conclusion: Both diagnostic tests showed relatively high sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant tumors in different organs. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had higher diagnostic accuracy than SWE in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE had higher accuracy in detecting hepatic cancer. However, the results were not statistically significant in hepatic and thyroid malignancies. Further head-to-head comparisons are needed to confirm the optimal imaging technique to differentiate each cancer type.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic Accuracy of PET for Differentiating True Glioma Progression From Post Treatment-Related Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets