Literature DB >> 18677207

Role of fluorodeoxyglucose-PET versus fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/computed tomography in detection of unknown primary tumor: a meta-analysis of the literature.

Meng-jie Dong1, Kui Zhao, Xiang-tong Lin, Jun Zhao, Ling-xiang Ruan, Zhen-feng Liu.   

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET and FDG-PET/computed tomography (CT) in the detection of primary tumors in patients presenting with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) unidentified by conventional workup, and to compare the statistical difference between the FDG-PET and FDG-PET/CT. Twenty-eight studies (involving a total of 910 patients) published between 1990 and 2007 were reviewed. These studies evaluated the role of FDG-PET and FDG-PET/CT in the detection of unknown primary tumors after physical examination and conventional workup failed to detect a primary tumor. Systematic methods were used to identify, select, and evaluate the methodological quality of the studies as well as to summarize the overall findings of sensitivity, specificity, and detection capacity of the primary tumor. The overall sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET in detecting unknown primary tumors were 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-0.84)] and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.74-0.83), respectively. Furthermore, FDG-PET detected 28.54% of tumors that were not apparent after CUP failed to be detected by conventional workup. Data were collected on the locations of primary tumors detected by FDG-PET in 17 studies and detected by FDG-PET/CT in seven studies. Tumors from the base of the tongue accounted for 20.7% (six of 29) of all false-positive FDG-PET scans, corresponding to a false-positive rate of 28.6% (six of 29), much higher than tumors from the others. FDG-PET exhibited a lower sensitivity with respect to the tumors at the base of the tongue and tonsils, which was 68.2 and 76.7%, respectively. In the eight studies with 430 patients diagnosed with CUP by FDG-PET/CT, 31.4% (n=135) of primary tumors were detected. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.78-0.87), respectively. FDG-PET and FDG-PET/CT can detect primary tumors that went undetected by physical examination and conventional workup. FDG-PET exhibited lower sensitivity with respect to the tumors at the base of the tongue and the tonsils.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18677207     DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e328302cd26

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Commun        ISSN: 0143-3636            Impact factor:   1.690


  15 in total

Review 1.  18F-FDG PET/CT as a diagnostic tool in patients with extracervical carcinoma of unknown primary site: a literature review.

Authors:  Anne Kirstine Hundahl Moller; Annika Loft; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Karen Damgaard Pedersen; Jesper Graff; Charlotte Birk Christensen; Katharina Perell; Bodil Laub Petersen; Gedske Daugaard
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2011-03-22

2.  Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Oncology: A Systematic Review of Clinical Effectiveness and Indications for Use.

Authors: 
Journal:  CADTH Technol Overv       Date:  2010-12-01

Review 3.  Carcinoma of unknown primary: key radiological issues from the recent National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines.

Authors:  M B Taylor; N R Bromham; S E Arnold
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  [Importance of nuclear medicine diagnostics in CUP syndrome].

Authors:  M C Winter; U Haberkorn; C Kratochwil
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 0.635

5.  Role of 18F-FDG PET in detecting primary site in the patient with primary unknown carcinoma.

Authors:  Kenichiro Yabuki; Mamoru Tsukuda; Choichi Horiuchi; Takahide Taguchi; Goshi Nishimura
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-09-03       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Primary small cell carcinoma of the breast with TTF-1 and neuroendocrine marker expressing carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Michael Christie; Laura Chin-Lenn; Monique M Watts; Alpha E Tsui; Malcolm R Buchanan
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2010-06-30

Review 7.  Cancers of unknown primary origin: current perspectives and future therapeutic strategies.

Authors:  Giulia Maria Stella; Rebecca Senetta; Adele Cassenti; Margherita Ronco; Paola Cassoni
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 5.531

8.  Contrast-enhanced [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-computed tomography as an initial imaging modality in patients presenting with metastatic malignancy of undefined primary origin.

Authors:  Avani Jain; Madhur Kumar Srivastava; Alok Suresh Pawaskar; Simon Shelley; Indirani Elangovan; Hasmukh Jain; Somnath Pandey; Shilpa Kalal; Jaykanth Amalachandran
Journal:  Indian J Nucl Med       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep

9.  Deep neck abscess as the predominant initial presentation of carcinoma of unknown primary: A case report.

Authors:  Wei-Ting Chen; Jui-Wen Lee; Kun-Wei Hsieh; Rong-Feng Chen
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 2.967

10.  The Accuracy of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Bone Lesions of Undetermined Origin.

Authors:  Cuneyt Tamam; Muge Tamam; Mehmet Mulazimoglu
Journal:  World J Nucl Med       Date:  2016 May-Aug
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.