We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Head-to-Head Comparison of [ 18 F]FDG PET Imaging and MRI for the Detection of Recurrence or Residual Tumor in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis.
- Authors
Quartuccio, Natale; Pulizzi, Sabina; Modica, Domenico Michele; Nicolosi, Stefania; D'Oppido, Dante; Moreci, Antonino Maria; Ialuna, Salvatore
- Abstract
Simple Summary: This meta-analysis compared PET imaging (PET/CT and PET) against MRI in detecting a residual tumor or recurrence in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) at the primary site, retrieving studies that included patients who had both types of scans within a short period after treatment. According to the collected evidence, PET/CT and PET are more sensitive compared to MRI in detecting tumors. However, both methods were equally able to correctly identify patients who did not have tumors. These findings suggest that PET imaging might be more reliable for detecting tumor recurrence or residual disease, which could help doctors make better decisions about patient care and follow-up after treatment for NPC. Background: This meta-analysis compared the diagnostic performance of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) or PET versus Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting recurrence or residual tumors at the primary site in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases to find studies with at least 20 patients with NPC undergoing both [18F]FDG PET/CT (or [18F]FDG PET) and MRI for detecting recurrence or assessing residual disease at the primary site. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT and MRI were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and compared. Results: Five studies, including 1908 patients (six patient groups), were included. PET imaging had higher sensitivity [93.3% (95% CI: 91.3–94.9%); I2 = 52.6%] compared to MRI [80.1% (95% CI: 77.2–82.8%); I2 = 68.3%], but the specificity of the two modalities was similar: 93.8% (95% CI: 92.2–95.2%; I2 = 0%) for PET/CT and 91.8% (95% CI: 90.1–93.4%; I2 = 94.3%) for MRI. The areas under the curve (AUCs) for PET/CT and MRI were 0.978 and 0.924, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.23). Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that [18F]FDG PET imaging and MRI do not significantly differ in diagnostic performance. Nevertheless, [18F]FDG PET imaging shows higher sensitivity than MRI.
- Subjects
CANCER relapse; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; DEOXY sugars; QUESTIONNAIRES; POSITRON emission tomography computed tomography; MAGNETIC resonance imaging; CANCER patients; META-analysis; DESCRIPTIVE statistics; SYSTEMATIC reviews; MEDLINE; NASOPHARYNX cancer; ONLINE information services; DATA analysis software; CONFIDENCE intervals; SENSITIVITY &; specificity (Statistics)
- Publication
Cancers, 2024, Vol 16, Issue 17, p3011
- ISSN
2072-6694
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.3390/cancers16173011