Ying Kan1, Shuxin Zhang1, Wei Wang1, Jie Liu1, Jigang Yang1, Zhenchang Wang2. 1. 1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metastatic pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PCs/PGLs) show high germline mutation, and 18F-FDG and 68Ga-DOTA peptide positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging are recommended for the diagnosis of metastatic of PCs. However, there has been lack of direct comparison of the two modalities in the diagnosis of metastatic of PCs up to now. PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the value of localization of 68Ga-somatostatin receptor analogs and 18F-FDG in the diagnosis of metastatic PCs/PGLs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines published in August 2016. We critically reviewed all studies based on the PICOS criteria. QUADAS-2 was used to evaluate the quality of the methodology of the included studies. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 17 studies (629 patients, average age [mean ± SD] = 42.7 ± 6.3 years). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG and 68Ga peptides were 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.78-0.91) and 0.55 (95% CI = 0.37-0.73), and 0.95 (95% CI = 0.92-0.97) and 0.87 (95% CI = 0.63-0.96), respectively. The area under the sROC curves of the 18F-FDG and 68Ga peptides were 0.88 (95% CI = 0.85-0.91) and 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74-0.81), respectively. A subgroup analysis demonstrated that the difference at the per-lesion level and gene mutation level was significant. CONCLUSION: Compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT, the 68Ga-somatostatin receptor demonstrated good performance in the localization of metastatic PCs/PGLs, especially those with germline mutations. The use of the 68Ga-somatostatin receptor can be a new tool in the diagnosis of metastatic PCs/PGLs.
BACKGROUND: Metastatic pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PCs/PGLs) show high germline mutation, and 18F-FDG and 68Ga-DOTA peptide positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging are recommended for the diagnosis of metastatic of PCs. However, there has been lack of direct comparison of the two modalities in the diagnosis of metastatic of PCs up to now. PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the value of localization of 68Ga-somatostatin receptor analogs and 18F-FDG in the diagnosis of metastatic PCs/PGLs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines published in August 2016. We critically reviewed all studies based on the PICOS criteria. QUADAS-2 was used to evaluate the quality of the methodology of the included studies. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 17 studies (629 patients, average age [mean ± SD] = 42.7 ± 6.3 years). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG and 68Ga peptides were 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.78-0.91) and 0.55 (95% CI = 0.37-0.73), and 0.95 (95% CI = 0.92-0.97) and 0.87 (95% CI = 0.63-0.96), respectively. The area under the sROC curves of the 18F-FDG and 68Ga peptides were 0.88 (95% CI = 0.85-0.91) and 0.78 (95% CI = 0.74-0.81), respectively. A subgroup analysis demonstrated that the difference at the per-lesion level and gene mutation level was significant. CONCLUSION: Compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT, the 68Ga-somatostatin receptor demonstrated good performance in the localization of metastatic PCs/PGLs, especially those with germline mutations. The use of the 68Ga-somatostatin receptor can be a new tool in the diagnosis of metastatic PCs/PGLs.
Authors: David Taïeb; Rodney J Hicks; Elif Hindié; Benjamin A Guillet; Anca Avram; Pietro Ghedini; Henri J Timmers; Aaron T Scott; Saeed Elojeimy; Domenico Rubello; Irène J Virgolini; Stefano Fanti; Sona Balogova; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Karel Pacak Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-06-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jorge A Carrasquillo; Clara C Chen; Abhishek Jha; Alexander Ling; Frank I Lin; Daniel A Pryma; Karel Pacak Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: R Garcia-Carbonero; F Matute Teresa; E Mercader-Cidoncha; M Mitjavila-Casanovas; M Robledo; I Tena; C Alvarez-Escola; M Arístegui; M R Bella-Cueto; C Ferrer-Albiach; F A Hanzu Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 3.405