{"title":"Applicability and performance of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET-based modalities for whole-body cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"K J Das, J K Meena, D Kumar","doi":"10.1007/s11604-024-01659-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Screening tests are the cornerstone for early detection and optimal management of cancers. Most of the present cancer-screening tests are intrusive, time-consuming, and specifically target a particular anatomical site or cancer type. Only a few studies have reported the objective measures of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET-based cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals. This review and meta-analysis is an attempt to assess the applicability and performance of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET-based modalities for whole-body cancer screening.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Literature searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were conducted using relevant MeSH terms and keywords, for articles published in the last 2 decades (2000-2022). Pooled estimates of diagnostic test accuracy-including sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) curve were generated using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies were included in the systematic review and 13 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis. The mean estimates of pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and Odds ratio using <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET with a 95% confidence interval were 0.47 (0.25-0.69), 0.97 (0.95-0.98), 18.8 (6.8-51.5), 0.45 (0.27-0.76), 41.0 (7.9-211.8) and for <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT were 0.83 (0.75-0.88), 0.98 (0.97-0.99), 49.7 (29.2-84.5), 0.15 (0.8-0.28), 329.9 (125.0-870.8), respectively. Among screening modalities, <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT had a higher accuracy i.e., the area under the HSROC curve (AUC): 0.91 (0.87-0.95) compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET: 0.72 (0.61-0.82).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that currently <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET-based screening has limited applicability for population-based cancer-screening programs. However, it has a promising role as a combined screening strategy for at-risk individuals and allows for comprehensive diagnostic and prognostic evaluation in high-resource settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14691,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-024-01659-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Screening tests are the cornerstone for early detection and optimal management of cancers. Most of the present cancer-screening tests are intrusive, time-consuming, and specifically target a particular anatomical site or cancer type. Only a few studies have reported the objective measures of 18F-FDG PET-based cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals. This review and meta-analysis is an attempt to assess the applicability and performance of 18F-FDG PET-based modalities for whole-body cancer screening.
Materials and methods: The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Literature searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were conducted using relevant MeSH terms and keywords, for articles published in the last 2 decades (2000-2022). Pooled estimates of diagnostic test accuracy-including sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) curve were generated using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis.
Results: Seventeen studies were included in the systematic review and 13 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis. The mean estimates of pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and Odds ratio using 18F-FDG PET with a 95% confidence interval were 0.47 (0.25-0.69), 0.97 (0.95-0.98), 18.8 (6.8-51.5), 0.45 (0.27-0.76), 41.0 (7.9-211.8) and for 18F-FDG PET/CT were 0.83 (0.75-0.88), 0.98 (0.97-0.99), 49.7 (29.2-84.5), 0.15 (0.8-0.28), 329.9 (125.0-870.8), respectively. Among screening modalities, 18F-FDG PET/CT had a higher accuracy i.e., the area under the HSROC curve (AUC): 0.91 (0.87-0.95) compared to 18F-FDG PET: 0.72 (0.61-0.82).
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that currently 18F-FDG PET-based screening has limited applicability for population-based cancer-screening programs. However, it has a promising role as a combined screening strategy for at-risk individuals and allows for comprehensive diagnostic and prognostic evaluation in high-resource settings.
期刊介绍:
Japanese Journal of Radiology is a peer-reviewed journal, officially published by the Japan Radiological Society. The main purpose of the journal is to provide a forum for the publication of papers documenting recent advances and new developments in the field of radiology in medicine and biology. The scope of Japanese Journal of Radiology encompasses but is not restricted to diagnostic radiology, interventional radiology, radiation oncology, nuclear medicine, radiation physics, and radiation biology. Additionally, the journal covers technical and industrial innovations. The journal welcomes original articles, technical notes, review articles, pictorial essays and letters to the editor. The journal also provides announcements from the boards and the committees of the society. Membership in the Japan Radiological Society is not a prerequisite for submission. Contributions are welcomed from all parts of the world.