Literature DB >> 18362381

Diagnostic accuracy of tests for lymph node status in primary cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tara J Selman1, Christopher Mann, Javier Zamora, Tracy-Louise Appleyard, Khalid Khan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lymph node status is the key to determining the prognosis and treatment of cervical cancer. However, it cannot be assessed clinically, and testing for nodal metastasis is controversial. We sought to systematically review the diagnostic accuracy literature on sentinel node biopsy, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography to evaluate the accuracy of each index test in determining lymph node status in patients with cervical cancer.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1966-2006), EMBASE (1980-2006), Medion (1980-2006) and the Cochrane library (Issue 2, 2006) for relevant articles. We also manually searched the reference lists from primary articles and reviews, and we contacted experts in the field for conference abstracts and unpublished studies. We performed random-effects meta-analysis of accuracy indices, and we performed meta-regression analysis to test the effect of study quality on diagnostic accuracy and to identify other sources of heterogeneity.
RESULTS: We included 72 relevant primary studies, involving a total of 5042 women, in our analysis. We found that, in determining lymph node status, sentinel node biopsy had a pooled positive likelihood ratio of 40.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.6-67.6) and a pooled negative likelihood ratio of 0.18 (95% CI 0.14-0.24). The pooled positive likelihood ratios (and 95% CI) were 15.3 (7.9-29.6) for positron emission tomography, 6.4 (4.9-8.3) for magnetic resonance imaging and 4.3 (3.0-6.2) for computed tomography. The pooled negative likelihood ratios (and 95% CIs) were 0.27 (0.11-0.66) for positron emission tomography, 0.50 (0.39-0.64) for magnetic resonance imaging and 0.58 (0.48-0.70) for computed tomography. Using a 27% pretest probability of lymph node metastasis among all cases (regardless of stage), we found that a positive sentinel node biopsy result increased post-test probability to 94% (95% CI 90%-96%), whereas a positive finding on positron emission tomography increased it to 85% (75%-92%).
INTERPRETATION: Sentinel node biopsy has greater accuracy in determining lymph node status among women with primary cervical cancer than current commonly used imaging methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18362381      PMCID: PMC2267838          DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.071124

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  26 in total

1.  Systematic reviews to evaluate diagnostic tests.

Authors:  K S Khan; J Dinnes; J Kleijnen
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.435

2.  Asymmetric funnel plots and publication bias in meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy.

Authors:  Fujian Song; Khalid S Khan; Jacqueline Dinnes; Alex J Sutton
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.196

3.  When is measuring sensitivity and specificity sufficient to evaluate a diagnostic test, and when do we need randomized trials?

Authors:  Sarah J Lord; Les Irwig; R John Simes
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-06-06       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET.

Authors:  M J Reinhardt; C Ehritt-Braun; D Vogelgesang; C Ihling; S Högerle; M Mix; E Moser; T M Krause
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 5.  Systematic reviews of diagnostic tests in cancer: review of methods and reporting.

Authors:  Susan Mallett; Jonathan J Deeks; Steve Halligan; Sally Hopewell; Victoria Cornelius; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-07-18

6.  Burden of cervical cancer in Europe: estimates for 2004.

Authors:  M Arbyn; A O Raifu; P Autier; J Ferlay
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2007-03-16       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 7.  New approaches in breast cancer management: sentinel node biopsy and intraoperative radiotherapy.

Authors:  Mohammed R S Keshtgar; Dennis W Chicken; Jeffrey S Tobias
Journal:  Int J Fertil Womens Med       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct

8.  Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Marcello Di Nisio; Nynke Smidt; Jeroen C van Rijn; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-02-14       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data.

Authors:  Javier Zamora; Victor Abraira; Alfonso Muriel; Khalid Khan; Arri Coomarasamy
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Penny F Whiting; Marie E Weswood; Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick N M Bossuyt; Jos Kleijnen
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-03-06       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  53 in total

1.  The quality of reporting of primary test accuracy studies in obstetrics and gynaecology: application of the STARD criteria.

Authors:  Tara J Selman; R Katie Morris; Javier Zamora; Khalid S Khan
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 2.809

2.  Methodological quality of test accuracy studies included in systematic reviews in obstetrics and gynaecology: sources of bias.

Authors:  Rachel K Morris; Tara J Selman; Javier Zamora; Khalid S Khan
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2011-03-22       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 3.  Pre-treatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Authors:  Elly Brockbank; Fani Kokka; Andrew Bryant; Christophe Pomel; Karina Reynolds
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-04-13

4.  Imaging of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Marcus Q Bernardini; Allan Covens
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-03-25       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  A novel dynamic field-matching technique for treatment of patients with para-aortic node-positive cervical cancer: Clinical experience.

Authors:  Craig Baden; Alexander Whitley; Javier López-Araujo; Richard Popple; Jun Duan; Robert Kim
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2015-11-21

Review 6.  Progress in the Study of Lymph Node Metastasis in Early-stage Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Bang-Xing Huang; Fang Fang
Journal:  Curr Med Sci       Date:  2018-08-20

7.  Comparison of 18F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI for pre-therapeutic tumor staging of patients with primary cancer of the uterine cervix.

Authors:  Theresia Sarabhai; Benedikt M Schaarschmidt; Axel Wetter; Julian Kirchner; Bahriye Aktas; Michael Forsting; Verena Ruhlmann; Ken Herrmann; Lale Umutlu; Johannes Grueneisen
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 8.  A comprehensive overview of radioguided surgery using gamma detection probe technology.

Authors:  Stephen P Povoski; Ryan L Neff; Cathy M Mojzisik; David M O'Malley; George H Hinkle; Nathan C Hall; Douglas A Murrey; Michael V Knopp; Edward W Martin
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 2.754

9.  Added-value of SPECT/CT to lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy in gynaecological cancers.

Authors:  Tarik Z Belhocine; Michel Prefontaine; Dominique Lanvin; Monique Bertrand; Irina Rachinsky; Helen Ettler; Pamela Zabel; Larry W Stitt; Akira Sugimoto; Jean-Luc Urbain
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-03-08

10.  Preoperative PET/CT FDG standardized uptake value of pelvic lymph nodes as a significant prognostic factor in patients with uterine cervical cancer.

Authors:  Hyun Hoon Chung; Gi Jeong Cheon; Keon Wook Kang; Jae Weon Kim; Noh-Hyun Park; Yong Sang Song
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.