Huijun Zhou1, Guohua Shen1, Wenjie Zhang1, Huawei Cai1, Yue Zhou1, Lin Li2. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China lilinhuaxi@sina.com.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The aim of this work was to assess the overall value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma using a metaanalysis. METHODS: The literature published between January 1990 and September 2014 was searched in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang databases to identify eligible studies on PET/CT of residual or recurrent lesions. The methodologic quality of the included studies was evaluated using the "quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy" tool. Summary sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and receiver-operating characteristic curve were obtained using Meta-DiSc freeware. Subgroups were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies, involving 1,253 subjects, were included in the metaanalysis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio, with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses, for (18)F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 0.93 (0.91-0.95), 0.87 (0.84-0.89), 5.52 (3.96-7.71), 0.12 (0.09-0.15), and 55.31 (34.94-87.57), respectively. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve and Q* index estimate of PET/CT were 0.9473 and 0.8869, respectively. There was no significant difference between the area under the curve of PET and PET/CT (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study has confirmed that (18)F-FDG PET/CT has high sensitivity and specificity but significant heterogeneity in the diagnosis of residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this work was to assess the overall value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma using a metaanalysis. METHODS: The literature published between January 1990 and September 2014 was searched in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang databases to identify eligible studies on PET/CT of residual or recurrent lesions. The methodologic quality of the included studies was evaluated using the "quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy" tool. Summary sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and receiver-operating characteristic curve were obtained using Meta-DiSc freeware. Subgroups were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies, involving 1,253 subjects, were included in the metaanalysis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio, with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses, for (18)F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 0.93 (0.91-0.95), 0.87 (0.84-0.89), 5.52 (3.96-7.71), 0.12 (0.09-0.15), and 55.31 (34.94-87.57), respectively. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve and Q* index estimate of PET/CT were 0.9473 and 0.8869, respectively. There was no significant difference between the area under the curve of PET and PET/CT (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study has confirmed that (18)F-FDG PET/CT has high sensitivity and specificity but significant heterogeneity in the diagnosis of residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma.