Combining Independent Studies of Diagnostic Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography in Mediastinal Lymph Node Staging for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online July, 2006
Combining Independent Studies of Diagnostic Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography in Mediastinal Lymph Node Staging for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
A meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance was conducted to compare the results of relevant studies reporting diagnostic accuracy values for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This paper deals with the two most accurate imaging techniques currently in use: positron emission tomography (PET) with FDG and computed tomography (CT). A statistical pooling method was used to perform a quantitative meta-analysis aimed at demonstrating the potential advantage of one of these two methods.
Methods
Studies in all languages published between 1998 and 2005 that examined the use of FDG-PET and CT for mediastinal staging in NSCLC patients, enrolled at least 18 participants, and provided enough data to allow calculation of sensitivity and specificity rates were considered eligible for the quantitative meta-analysis. Statistical methods to pool the overall estimates of sensitivity and specificity and to compare the discriminant power of PET and CT were discussed and used.
Results
Of the 13 studies included in the analysis, 12 reported greater accuracy of FDG-PET than CT in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases. The sensitivity of FDG-PET ranged from 50% to 100%. The estimate of the overall sensitivity was 0.83% with 95% CI (0.749–0.913). Specificity ranged from 79% to 100%, with an overall estimated specificity of 0.87% with 95% CI (0.80–0.95). For CT, the sensitivity and specificity ranged from 50% to 97% and 58% to 94%, respectively; the overall estimate was 0.68% with 95% CI (0.582–0.788) and 0.76% with 95% CI (0.668–0.859). The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) approach was used to assess the superior diagnostic accuracy of one of the two methods. The areas under the two SROC curves were AUCPET = 0.909 vs AUCCT = 0.794.
Conclusions
Numerical and visual results of the meta-analysis of recent relevant reports agreed that FDG-PET is more accurate than CT in identifying mediastinal lymph node metastases in non-small cell lung cancer.
SazonD.A., SantiagoS.M., Soo HooG.W., KhonsaryA., BrownC., MandelkernM., BlahdW., WilliamsA.J.: Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of lung cancer.Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 153: 417–421, 1996.
2.
EggerM., SmithG.D., PhillipsA.N.: Meta-analysis: principles and procedures.BMJ, 315: 1533–1537, 1997.
3.
BossuytP.M., ReitsmaJ.B., BrunsD.E., GatsonisC.A., GlasziouP.P., IrwigL.M., LijmerJ.G., MoherD., RennieD., de VetH.C.: Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.BMJ, 326: 41–44, 2003.
4.
DevilleW.L., BuntinxF., BouterL.M., MontoriV.M., de VetH.C., van der WindtD.A., BezemerP.D.: Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines.BMC Med Res Methodol, 3: 2–9, 2002.
MosesL.E., ShapiroD., LittenbergB.: Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations.Stat Med, 12: 1293–1316, 1993.
7.
IrwigL., MacaskillP., GlasziouP., FaheyM.: Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy.J Clin Epidemiol, 48: 119–130, 1995.
8.
VansteenkisteJ.F., StroobantsS.G., De LeynP.R., DupontP.J., VerschakelenJ.A., NackaertsK.L., MortelmansL.A.: Mediastinal lymph node staging with FDG-PET scan in patients with potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer a prospective analysis of 50 cases.Chest, 112: 1480–1486, 1997.
9.
AlbesJ.M., DohmenB.M., SchottU., SchulenE., WehrmannM., ZiemerG.: Value of positron emission tomography for lung cancer staging.Eur J Surg Oncol, 28: 55–62, 2002.
10.
MaromE.M., McAdamsH.P., ErasmusJ.J., GoodmanP.C., CulhaneD.K., ColemanR.E., HerndonJ.E., PatzEFJr.: Staging non-small cell lung cancer with whole-body PET.Radiology, 212: 803–809, 1999.
11.
RichterJ.A., TorreW., GamezC., AramendiaJ.M., CrespoA., NicolasA., BrugarolasA.: Value of Pet-18FDG in lung cancer.Med Clin Barc, 113: 567–571, 1999.
12.
KubotaK., ImranM.B., OnoS., AkaizawaT., GotohR., FukudaH.: Diagnostic value of whole-body positron emission tomography using fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose for lung and other cancer.Jpn J Clin Radiol, 45: 199–208, 2000.
13.
PietermanR.M., Van PuttenJ.W.G., MeuzelaarJ.J., MooyaartE.L., VaalburgW., KoeterG.H., FidlerV., PruimJ., GroenH.J.: Preoperative staging of non-small cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography.N Engl J Med, 343: 254–261, 2000.
14.
WengE., TranL., RegeS., SafaA., SadeghiA., JuillardG., JuillardG., MarkR., SantiagoS., BrownC., MandelkernM.: Accuracy and clinical impact of mediastinal lymph node staging with FDG-PET imaging in potentially resectable lung cancer.Am J Clin Oncol, 23: 47–52, 2000.
15.
PonceletA.J., LonneuxM., CocheE., WeynandB., NoirhommeP.H.: PET-FDG scan enhances but does not replace preoperative surgical staging in non-small cell lung cancer.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 20: 468–475, 2001.
16.
LuketichJ.D., FriedmanD.M., MeltzerC.C., BelaniC.P., TownsendD.W., ChristieN.A., WeigelT.L.: The role of positron emission tomography in evaluating mediastinal lymph node metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer.Clin Lung Cancer, 2: 229–233, 2001.
17.
KiernanP.D., SheridanM.J., LambertiJ., DiciccoB., WigtonR., HetrickV., VaughanB., GralingP.: Mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung carcinoma using computed and positron-emission tomography.South Med J, 95: 1168–1172, 2002.
18.
Von HaagD.W., FolletteD.M., RobertsP.F., SheltonD., SegelL.D., TaylorT.M.: Advantages of positron emission tomography over computed tomography in mediastinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer.J Surg Res, 103: 160–164, 2002.
HalterG., BuckA.K., SchirrmeisterH., AksoyE., LiewaldF., GlattingG., NeumaierB., MuhlingB., Nussle-KugeleK., HetzelM., Sunder-PlassmannL., ReskeS.N.: Lymph node staging in lung cancer using [18F]FDG-PET.Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 522: 96–101, 2004.
21.
DalesR.E., StarkR.M., RamanS.: Computed tomography to stage lung cancer.Approaching a controversy using metaanalysis. Am Rev Respir Dis, 141: 1096–1101, 1990.
22.
McKennaR., LibshitzH., MountainC., McMurtreyM.: Roentgenographic evaluation of mediastinal nodes for preoperative assesment in lung cancer.Chest, 88: 206–210, 1985.
23.
WebbW.R., GatsourisS., ZerhouniE.A., HeelanR.T., BlazerG.M., FrancisI.R., McNeilB.J.: CT and MR imaging in staging non-small cell bronchogenic carcinoma: report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group.Radiology, 178: 705–713, 1991.
24.
SchrevensL., LorentN., DoomsC., VansteenkisteJ.: The role of PET scan in diagnosis, staging, and management of non-small cell lung cancer.Oncologist, 9: 633–643, 2004.
25.
WhiteP.G., AdamsH., CraneM.D., ButchardEg: Preoperative staging of carcinoma of the bronchus: can computed tomographic scanning reliably identify stage III tumours?Thorax, 49: 951–957, 1994.
26.
DwamenaB.A., SonnadS.S., AngobaldoJ.O., WahlR.L.: Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s – meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT.Radiology, 213: 530–536, 1999.
27.
GouldM.K., KuschnerW.G., RydzakC.E., MacleanC.C., DemasA.N., ShigemitsuH., ChanG.K., OwensD.K.: Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.Ann Intern Med, 139: 879–892, 2003.
28.
HellwigD., UkenaD., PaulsenF., BambergM., KirschC.M.: Meta-analysis of the efficacy of positron emission tomography with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in lung tumours.Basis for discussion of the German Consensus Conference on PET in Oncology. Pneumologie, 55: 367–355, 2001.
29.
FischerB.M., MortensenJ., HojgaardL.: Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer: a systematic, quantitative review.Lancet Oncol, 2: 659–666, 2001.
30.
TolozaE.M., HarpoleL., McCroryD.C.: Noninvasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: a review of the current evidence.Chest,123(Suppl 1): 137–146, 2003.
31.
KonishiJ., YamazakiK., TsukamotoE., TamakiN., OnoderaY., OtokaT., MorikawaT., KinoshitaI., Dosaka-AkitaH., NishimuraM.: Mediastinal lymph node staging by FDG-PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: analysis of false-positive FDG-PET findings.Respiration, 70: 500–506, 2003.
32.
SchmuckingM., BaumR.P., BonnetR., JunkerK., MullerK.M.: Correlation of histologic results with PET findings for tumor regression and survival in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant treatment.Pathology, 26: 178–189, 2005.
33.
LardinoisD., WederW., HanyT.F., KamelE.M., KoromS., SeifertB., von SchulthessG.K., SteinertH.C.: Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography.N Engl J Med,348(25): 2500–2507, 2003.
34.
CerfolioR.J., OjhaB., BryantA.S., RaghuveerV., MountzJ.M., BartolucciA.A.: The accuracy of integrated PET-CT compared with dedicated PET alone for the staging of patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Ann Thorac Surg, 78: 1017–1023, 2004.
35.
ShimS.S., LeeK.S., KimB.T., ChungM.J., LeeE.J., HanJ., ChoiJ.Y., KwonO.J., ShimY.M., KimS.: Non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of integrated FDG PET/CT and CT alone for preoperative staging.Radiology, 236: 1011–1019, 2005.
36.
Pozo-Rodriguez F, Martin de Nicolas JL, Sanchez-Nistal MA, Maldonado A, Garcia de Barajas S, Calero-Garcia R, Pozo MA, Martin-Escribano P, Martin-Garcia I, Garcia-Lujan R, Lopez-Encuentra A, Arenas de Pablo A: Accuracy of helical computed tomography and [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for identifying lymph node mediastinal metastases in potentially resectable non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol, 23: 8348–8356, 2005.
