{"title":"国际细胞学学会横滨系统报告乳腺细针穿刺活检诊断乳腺癌准确性的系统评价和荟萃分析。","authors":"Pranoy Paul, Shweta Azad, Shruti Agrawal, Shalinee Rao, Nilotpal Chowdhury","doi":"10.1159/000527346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective is to determine the accuracy of fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) in breast lesions reported according to the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) Yokohama system for reporting breast FNAB. The participants include any patient presenting with any breast lesion found suitable for FNAB. The target condition was breast cancer. The secondary objective was to study the proportion of inadequate FNAB in the selected studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies having all the following key search terms: Breast AND FNAB AND Diagnostic Accuracy published in the time frame of 2017 to May 16, 2022. The Cochrane and PROSPERO databases, citations of selected articles and articles citing the selected articles were also searched. Studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of breast FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer, which had at least 75 subjects (and at least 20 subjects each in the benign and malignant FNAB groups), were selected. The reference standard was histopathology (or adequate clinical follow-up for benign disease). Studies were screened independently by two researchers, with a consensus reached among the authors in cases of conflict. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity at each diagnostic cut-off were assessed by bivariate generalized linear mixed-model meta-analysis. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and inadequacy rate were assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. The confidence intervals of sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were examined against a value of 0.95.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two studies, all of which were cross-sectional single-gate studies, were selected with a total of 10,886 subjects with a primary breast lesion having concurrent FNAB and reference standard reports. Sensitivity and specificity, with 95% confidence intervals, were 0.978 [0.968, 0.985] and 0.832 [0.76, 0.886] for the diagnostic cut-off of \"Atypical considered positive for malignancy,\" 0.916 [0.892, 0.935] and 0.983 [0.97, 0.99] for the cut-off of \"Suspicious of Malignancy considered positive,\" and 0.763 [0.706, 0.812] and 0.999 [0.994, 1] for the cut-off of \"Malignant considered positive.\" The overall AUC was 0.975 [0.962, 0.984]. FNAB sampling without imaging guidance was associated with lower inadequacy.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is strong evidence that the overall accuracy, sensitivity for \"Atypical category considered positive\" and specificity when \"Suspicious or Malignant categories are considered positive\" of FNAB are high when using the categories of the IAC Yokohama Reporting System, demonstrating the usefulness of FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":6959,"journal":{"name":"Acta Cytologica","volume":"67 1","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy in Diagnosing Breast Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Pranoy Paul, Shweta Azad, Shruti Agrawal, Shalinee Rao, Nilotpal Chowdhury\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000527346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective is to determine the accuracy of fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) in breast lesions reported according to the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) Yokohama system for reporting breast FNAB. The participants include any patient presenting with any breast lesion found suitable for FNAB. The target condition was breast cancer. The secondary objective was to study the proportion of inadequate FNAB in the selected studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies having all the following key search terms: Breast AND FNAB AND Diagnostic Accuracy published in the time frame of 2017 to May 16, 2022. The Cochrane and PROSPERO databases, citations of selected articles and articles citing the selected articles were also searched. Studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of breast FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer, which had at least 75 subjects (and at least 20 subjects each in the benign and malignant FNAB groups), were selected. The reference standard was histopathology (or adequate clinical follow-up for benign disease). Studies were screened independently by two researchers, with a consensus reached among the authors in cases of conflict. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity at each diagnostic cut-off were assessed by bivariate generalized linear mixed-model meta-analysis. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and inadequacy rate were assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. The confidence intervals of sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were examined against a value of 0.95.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two studies, all of which were cross-sectional single-gate studies, were selected with a total of 10,886 subjects with a primary breast lesion having concurrent FNAB and reference standard reports. Sensitivity and specificity, with 95% confidence intervals, were 0.978 [0.968, 0.985] and 0.832 [0.76, 0.886] for the diagnostic cut-off of \\\"Atypical considered positive for malignancy,\\\" 0.916 [0.892, 0.935] and 0.983 [0.97, 0.99] for the cut-off of \\\"Suspicious of Malignancy considered positive,\\\" and 0.763 [0.706, 0.812] and 0.999 [0.994, 1] for the cut-off of \\\"Malignant considered positive.\\\" The overall AUC was 0.975 [0.962, 0.984]. FNAB sampling without imaging guidance was associated with lower inadequacy.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is strong evidence that the overall accuracy, sensitivity for \\\"Atypical category considered positive\\\" and specificity when \\\"Suspicious or Malignant categories are considered positive\\\" of FNAB are high when using the categories of the IAC Yokohama Reporting System, demonstrating the usefulness of FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6959,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Cytologica\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Cytologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000527346\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Cytologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000527346","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:主要目的是确定根据国际细胞学学会(IAC)横滨报告乳腺FNAB系统报告的乳腺病变中细针穿刺活检(FNAB)的准确性。参与者包括任何发现适合FNAB的乳房病变的患者。目标条件是乳腺癌。次要目的是研究所选研究中FNAB不足的比例。方法:检索PubMed/MEDLINE和Embase,检索2017年至2022年5月16日期间发表的具有以下所有关键搜索词的研究:Breast and FNAB and Diagnostic Accuracy。检索Cochrane和PROSPERO数据库、入选文章的引文和引用入选文章的文章。评估乳腺FNAB诊断乳腺癌准确性的研究,至少有75名受试者(良性和恶性FNAB组各至少20名受试者)入选。参照标准是组织病理学(或对良性疾病进行充分的临床随访)。研究由两名研究人员独立筛选,在有冲突的情况下,作者之间达成共识。使用QUADAS-2工具评估偏倚风险和适用性。通过双变量广义线性混合模型荟萃分析评估每个诊断截止点的敏感性和特异性。采用随机效应荟萃分析评估受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)和不充分率。灵敏度、特异性和AUC的置信区间均为0.95。结果:22项研究均为横断面单门研究,共纳入10,886例原发性乳腺病变同时伴有FNAB和参考标准报告的受试者。“非典型诊断为恶性肿瘤阳性”的诊断截止值的敏感性和特异性分别为0.978[0.968,0.985]和0.832[0.76,0.886],“疑似恶性肿瘤诊断为阳性”的诊断截止值分别为0.916[0.892,0.935]和0.983[0.97,0.99],“恶性肿瘤诊断为阳性”的诊断截止值分别为0.763[0.706,0.812]和0.999[0.994,1],95%置信区间。总AUC为0.975[0.962,0.984]。无成像引导的FNAB取样与较低的不充分性相关。讨论:有强有力的证据表明,当使用IAC横滨报告系统的分类时,FNAB的总体准确性、“非典型类别被认为是阳性”的敏感性和“可疑或恶性类别被认为是阳性”的特异性都很高,证明了FNAB在诊断乳腺癌中的有用性。
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Diagnostic Accuracy of the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy in Diagnosing Breast Cancer.
Objectives: The primary objective is to determine the accuracy of fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) in breast lesions reported according to the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) Yokohama system for reporting breast FNAB. The participants include any patient presenting with any breast lesion found suitable for FNAB. The target condition was breast cancer. The secondary objective was to study the proportion of inadequate FNAB in the selected studies.
Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies having all the following key search terms: Breast AND FNAB AND Diagnostic Accuracy published in the time frame of 2017 to May 16, 2022. The Cochrane and PROSPERO databases, citations of selected articles and articles citing the selected articles were also searched. Studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of breast FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer, which had at least 75 subjects (and at least 20 subjects each in the benign and malignant FNAB groups), were selected. The reference standard was histopathology (or adequate clinical follow-up for benign disease). Studies were screened independently by two researchers, with a consensus reached among the authors in cases of conflict. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Sensitivity and specificity at each diagnostic cut-off were assessed by bivariate generalized linear mixed-model meta-analysis. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and inadequacy rate were assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. The confidence intervals of sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were examined against a value of 0.95.
Results: Twenty-two studies, all of which were cross-sectional single-gate studies, were selected with a total of 10,886 subjects with a primary breast lesion having concurrent FNAB and reference standard reports. Sensitivity and specificity, with 95% confidence intervals, were 0.978 [0.968, 0.985] and 0.832 [0.76, 0.886] for the diagnostic cut-off of "Atypical considered positive for malignancy," 0.916 [0.892, 0.935] and 0.983 [0.97, 0.99] for the cut-off of "Suspicious of Malignancy considered positive," and 0.763 [0.706, 0.812] and 0.999 [0.994, 1] for the cut-off of "Malignant considered positive." The overall AUC was 0.975 [0.962, 0.984]. FNAB sampling without imaging guidance was associated with lower inadequacy.
Discussion: There is strong evidence that the overall accuracy, sensitivity for "Atypical category considered positive" and specificity when "Suspicious or Malignant categories are considered positive" of FNAB are high when using the categories of the IAC Yokohama Reporting System, demonstrating the usefulness of FNAB in diagnosing breast cancer.
期刊介绍:
With articles offering an excellent balance between clinical cytology and cytopathology, ''Acta Cytologica'' fosters the understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms behind cytomorphology and thus facilitates the translation of frontline research into clinical practice. As the official journal of the International Academy of Cytology and affiliated to over 50 national cytology societies around the world, ''Acta Cytologica'' evaluates new and existing diagnostic applications of scientific advances as well as their clinical correlations. Original papers, review articles, meta-analyses, novel insights from clinical practice, and letters to the editor cover topics from diagnostic cytopathology, gynecologic and non-gynecologic cytopathology to fine needle aspiration, molecular techniques and their diagnostic applications. As the perfect reference for practical use, ''Acta Cytologica'' addresses a multidisciplinary audience practicing clinical cytopathology, cell biology, oncology, interventional radiology, otorhinolaryngology, gastroenterology, urology, pulmonology and preventive medicine.