Cargando…

[(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rationale and objectives: Although low-dose computed tomography (CT) is a recommended modality for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations, the role of other modalities, such as [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET), is unclear. We conducted a systematic review to descr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chien, Chun-Ru, Liang, Ji-An, Chen, Jin-Hua, Wang, Hsiao-Nin, Lin, Cheng-Chieh, Chen, Chih-Yi, Wang, Pin-Hui, Kao, Chia-Hung, Yeh, Jun-Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: e-Med 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3864168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24334433
http://dx.doi.org/10.1102/1470-7330.2013.0038
_version_ 1782295904908214272
author Chien, Chun-Ru
Liang, Ji-An
Chen, Jin-Hua
Wang, Hsiao-Nin
Lin, Cheng-Chieh
Chen, Chih-Yi
Wang, Pin-Hui
Kao, Chia-Hung
Yeh, Jun-Jun
author_facet Chien, Chun-Ru
Liang, Ji-An
Chen, Jin-Hua
Wang, Hsiao-Nin
Lin, Cheng-Chieh
Chen, Chih-Yi
Wang, Pin-Hui
Kao, Chia-Hung
Yeh, Jun-Jun
author_sort Chien, Chun-Ru
collection PubMed
description Rationale and objectives: Although low-dose computed tomography (CT) is a recommended modality for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations, the role of other modalities, such as [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET), is unclear. We conducted a systematic review to describe the role of PET in lung cancer screening. Materials and methods: A systematic review was conducted by reviewing primary studies focusing on PET screening for lung cancer until July 2012. Two independent reviewers identified studies that were compatible for inclusion/exclusion criteria. The analysis was restricted to English and included studies published since 2000. A descriptive analysis was used to summarize the results, and the pooled diagnostic performance of selective PET screening was calculated by weighted average using individual sample sizes. Results: Among the identified studies (n = 3497), 12 studies were included for analysis. None of the studies evaluated the efficacy of primary PET screening specific to lung cancer. Eight studies focused on primary PET screening for all types of cancer; the detection rates of lung cancer were low. Four studies reported evidence of lung cancer screening programs with selective PET, in which the estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity was 83% and 91%, respectively. Conclusions: The role of primary PET screening for lung cancer remains unknown. However, PET has high sensitivity and specificity as a selective screening modality. Further studies must be conducted to evaluate the use of PET or PET/computed tomography screening for high-risk populations, preferably using randomized trials or prospective registration. Advances in knowledge: Our meta-analysis indicates that PET has high sensitivity and specificity as a selective screening modality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3864168
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher e-Med
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38641682014-06-13 [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Chien, Chun-Ru Liang, Ji-An Chen, Jin-Hua Wang, Hsiao-Nin Lin, Cheng-Chieh Chen, Chih-Yi Wang, Pin-Hui Kao, Chia-Hung Yeh, Jun-Jun Cancer Imaging Review Rationale and objectives: Although low-dose computed tomography (CT) is a recommended modality for lung cancer screening in high-risk populations, the role of other modalities, such as [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET), is unclear. We conducted a systematic review to describe the role of PET in lung cancer screening. Materials and methods: A systematic review was conducted by reviewing primary studies focusing on PET screening for lung cancer until July 2012. Two independent reviewers identified studies that were compatible for inclusion/exclusion criteria. The analysis was restricted to English and included studies published since 2000. A descriptive analysis was used to summarize the results, and the pooled diagnostic performance of selective PET screening was calculated by weighted average using individual sample sizes. Results: Among the identified studies (n = 3497), 12 studies were included for analysis. None of the studies evaluated the efficacy of primary PET screening specific to lung cancer. Eight studies focused on primary PET screening for all types of cancer; the detection rates of lung cancer were low. Four studies reported evidence of lung cancer screening programs with selective PET, in which the estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity was 83% and 91%, respectively. Conclusions: The role of primary PET screening for lung cancer remains unknown. However, PET has high sensitivity and specificity as a selective screening modality. Further studies must be conducted to evaluate the use of PET or PET/computed tomography screening for high-risk populations, preferably using randomized trials or prospective registration. Advances in knowledge: Our meta-analysis indicates that PET has high sensitivity and specificity as a selective screening modality. e-Med 2013-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3864168/ /pubmed/24334433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1102/1470-7330.2013.0038 Text en © 2013 International Cancer Imaging Society
spellingShingle Review
Chien, Chun-Ru
Liang, Ji-An
Chen, Jin-Hua
Wang, Hsiao-Nin
Lin, Cheng-Chieh
Chen, Chih-Yi
Wang, Pin-Hui
Kao, Chia-Hung
Yeh, Jun-Jun
[(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort [(18)f]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography screening for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3864168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24334433
http://dx.doi.org/10.1102/1470-7330.2013.0038
work_keys_str_mv AT chienchunru 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liangjian 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chenjinhua 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wanghsiaonin 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT linchengchieh 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chenchihyi 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wangpinhui 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kaochiahung 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yehjunjun 18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyscreeningforlungcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis