BACKGROUND: This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze published data on the diagnostic performance of (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in detecting bone marrow involvement in newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma, and to determine whether FDG-PET/CT can replace blind bone marrow biopsy (BMB) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PubMed/Medline and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant studies. Methodological quality of each study was assessed. Sensitivities and specificities of FDG-PET/CT in individual studies were calculated and underwent meta-analysis with a random effects model. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was constructed with the Moses-Shapiro-Littenberg method. The weighted summary proportion of FDG-PET/CT-negative patients with a positive BMB among all cases was calculated under the fixed effects model. RESULTS: Nine eligible studies, comprising a total of 955 patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma, were included. Overall, the studies were of moderate methodological quality. The sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET/CT for the detection of bone marrow involvement ranged from 87.5% to 100% and from 86.7% to 100%, respectively, with pooled estimates of 96.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 93.0% to 99.0%] and 99.7% (95% CI 98.9% to 100%), respectively. The area under the sROC curve was 0.9860. The weighted summary proportion of FDG-PET/CT-negative patients with a positive BMB among all cases was 1.1% (95% CI 0.6% to 2.0%). CONCLUSION: Although the methodological quality of studies that were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis was moderate, the current evidence suggests that FDG-PET/CT may be an appropriate method to replace BMB in newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze published data on the diagnostic performance of (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in detecting bone marrow involvement in newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma, and to determine whether FDG-PET/CT can replace blind bone marrow biopsy (BMB) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PubMed/Medline and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant studies. Methodological quality of each study was assessed. Sensitivities and specificities of FDG-PET/CT in individual studies were calculated and underwent meta-analysis with a random effects model. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was constructed with the Moses-Shapiro-Littenberg method. The weighted summary proportion of FDG-PET/CT-negative patients with a positive BMB among all cases was calculated under the fixed effects model. RESULTS: Nine eligible studies, comprising a total of 955 patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma, were included. Overall, the studies were of moderate methodological quality. The sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET/CT for the detection of bone marrow involvement ranged from 87.5% to 100% and from 86.7% to 100%, respectively, with pooled estimates of 96.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 93.0% to 99.0%] and 99.7% (95% CI 98.9% to 100%), respectively. The area under the sROC curve was 0.9860. The weighted summary proportion of FDG-PET/CT-negative patients with a positive BMB among all cases was 1.1% (95% CI 0.6% to 2.0%). CONCLUSION: Although the methodological quality of studies that were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis was moderate, the current evidence suggests that FDG-PET/CT may be an appropriate method to replace BMB in newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma.
Entities:
Keywords:
FDG-PET/CT; Hodgkin; biopsy; bone marrow; meta-analysis; systematic review
Authors: Hugo J A Adams; Thomas C Kwee; Rob Fijnheer; Stefan V Dubois; Peter E Blase; Rutger A J Nievelstein; John M H de Klerk Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2014-06-06 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Juan Pablo Alderuccio; Derek Isrow; Isildinha M Reis; Sunil Girish Iyer; Jessica J Meshman; Wei Zhao; Francisco Vega; Jennifer R Chapman; Arnold M Markoe; Izidore S Lossos Journal: Blood Date: 2020-04-09 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Abhishek R Keraliya; Katherine M Krajewski; Jyothi P Jagannathan; Atul B Shinagare; Marta Braschi-Amirfarzan; Sree H Tirumani; Nikhil H Ramaiya Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Frédérique St-Pierre; Stephen M Broski; Betsy R LaPlant; Matthew J Maurer; Kay Ristow; Gita Thanarajasingam; William R Macon; Thomas M Habermann; Thomas E Witzig Journal: Oncologist Date: 2020-04-28