Accuracy of whole‐body PET and PET‐CT in initial M staging of head and neck cancer: A meta‐analysis
Guozeng Xu, Xiaodong Zhu, M Li
Abstract
Guozeng Xu, Xiaodong Zhu, M Li
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) and PET-CT in initial M staging of head and neck cancer. METHODS: After a systematic review of English language studies, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of whole-body PET and PET-CT were pooled. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were also used to summarize overall test performance. RESULTS: Eight PET and 7 PET-CT studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity estimates for PET and PET-CT were 0.848 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.776-0.905) and 0.875 (95% CI, 0.787-0.936). The pooled specificity estimates were 0.952 (95% CI, 0.933-0.967) and 0.950 (95% CI, 0.931-0.964). The Q* index estimates for PET-CT (0.9409) were not significantly higher than for PET (0.9154; p > .05). CONCLUSION: Whole-body PET and PET-CT have good diagnostic performance in initial M staging of head and neck cancer; although PET-CT tends to have higher accuracy than PET.
OpenAlex reports 38 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) and PET-CT in initial M staging of head and neck cancer. METHODS: After a systematic review of English language studies, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of whole-body PET and PET-CT were pooled. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were also used to summarize overall test performance. RESULTS: Eight PET and 7 PET-CT studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity estimates for PET and PET-CT were 0.848 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.776-0.905) and 0.875 (95% CI, 0.787-0.936). The pooled specificity estimates were 0.952 (95% CI, 0.933-0.967) and 0.950 (95% CI, 0.931-0.964). The Q* index estimates for PET-CT (0.9409) were not significantly higher than for PET (0.9154; p > .05). CONCLUSION: Whole-body PET and PET-CT have good diagnostic performance in initial M staging of head and neck cancer; although PET-CT tends to have higher accuracy than PET.
Key concepts: Medicine, Nuclear medicine, Head and neck cancer, Positron emission tomography, PET-CT, Head and neck, Confidence interval, Meta-analysis