Friederike Schütz1, Christine Lautenschläger1, Kerstin Lorenz2, Johannes Haerting1. 1. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute for Medical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Informatics, Halle (Saale), Germany. 2. Department of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, Medical Faculty, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT are functional imaging methods that are widely used in diagnostic procedures in oncology. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the patient-relevant benefit of PET or PET/CT in patients with thyroid cancer based on a literature review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic review including studies that had been published until December 2013 was performed. To be included, studies had to prospectively investigate patients with thyroid cancer in a clinical setting of staging, restaging, or diagnosing tumour recurrence. RESULTS: Out of 3,506 potentially relevant articles, 29 studies were included. No study directly evaluated the benefits of PET. Twenty-eight studies dealt with the diagnostic accuracy of PET or PET/CT, and 1 study evaluated the prognostic value of PET/CT. The authors showed that a positive result of PET/CT in restaging patients with differentiated thyroid cancer yielded a significant decrease in overall survival (hazard ratio, HR 5.01, CI 3.41-6.62). In patients with suspected recurrence of differentiated thyroid cancer, meta-analysis showed higher sensitivity of PET (89.7%, CI 78-99%) and PET/CT (94.3%, CI 87-97%) compared with conventional imaging (65.4%, CI 32-88%) and comparable results for specificity. Due to the low numbers of studies and patients, meta-analyses on medullary carcinoma did not produce meaningful results. CONCLUSION: The patient-relevant benefits of PET or PET/CT in thyroid cancer could not be evaluated satisfactorily based on the included studies. It remains unclear whether higher diagnostic test accuracy leads to changes in therapeutic strategies and better patient-relevant outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT are functional imaging methods that are widely used in diagnostic procedures in oncology. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the patient-relevant benefit of PET or PET/CT in patients with thyroid cancer based on a literature review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic review including studies that had been published until December 2013 was performed. To be included, studies had to prospectively investigate patients with thyroid cancer in a clinical setting of staging, restaging, or diagnosing tumour recurrence. RESULTS: Out of 3,506 potentially relevant articles, 29 studies were included. No study directly evaluated the benefits of PET. Twenty-eight studies dealt with the diagnostic accuracy of PET or PET/CT, and 1 study evaluated the prognostic value of PET/CT. The authors showed that a positive result of PET/CT in restaging patients with differentiated thyroid cancer yielded a significant decrease in overall survival (hazard ratio, HR 5.01, CI 3.41-6.62). In patients with suspected recurrence of differentiated thyroid cancer, meta-analysis showed higher sensitivity of PET (89.7%, CI 78-99%) and PET/CT (94.3%, CI 87-97%) compared with conventional imaging (65.4%, CI 32-88%) and comparable results for specificity. Due to the low numbers of studies and patients, meta-analyses on medullary carcinoma did not produce meaningful results. CONCLUSION: The patient-relevant benefits of PET or PET/CT in thyroid cancer could not be evaluated satisfactorily based on the included studies. It remains unclear whether higher diagnostic test accuracy leads to changes in therapeutic strategies and better patient-relevant outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Meta-analysis; Positron emission tomography; Systematic review; Thyroid cancer
Authors: Marcia S Brose; Christopher M Nutting; Barbara Jarzab; Rossella Elisei; Salvatore Siena; Lars Bastholt; Christelle de la Fouchardiere; Furio Pacini; Ralf Paschke; Young Kee Shong; Steven I Sherman; Johannes W A Smit; John Chung; Christian Kappeler; Carol Peña; István Molnár; Martin J Schlumberger Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lilian Yuri Itaya Yamaga; Marcelo L Cunha; Guilherme C Campos Neto; Marcio R T Garcia; Ji H Yang; Cleber P Camacho; Jairo Wagner; Marcelo B G Funari Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Martin Schlumberger; Makoto Tahara; Lori J Wirth; Bruce Robinson; Marcia S Brose; Rossella Elisei; Mouhammed Amir Habra; Kate Newbold; Manisha H Shah; Ana O Hoff; Andrew G Gianoukakis; Naomi Kiyota; Matthew H Taylor; Sung-Bae Kim; Monika K Krzyzanowska; Corina E Dutcus; Begoña de las Heras; Junming Zhu; Steven I Sherman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anja T Golubić; Eva Pasini Nemir; Marijan Žuvić; Andrea Mutvar; Sanja Kusačić Kuna; Marija Despot; Tatjana Samardžić; Dražen Huić Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 1.690