Diagnostic Performance of PET/MRI in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Bivariate Meta-analysis |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital (Xiamen), Fudan University, Xiamen, China;2. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Minnan PET Center, Xiamen Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China;1. Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI;2. Cancer Center of Kansas, Wichita, KS;3. Kansas University School of Medicine, Wichita, KS;1. Gynecology and Breast Care Center, Mater Olbia Hospital, Olbia, Italy;2. Radiology Unit, Mater Olbia Hospital (Qatar Foundation Endowment and Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS Foundation), Olbia, Italy;3. Department of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Rome, Italy;4. Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Sassari, Sassari University Hospital Trust, Sassari, Italy;1. Department of Head and neck &Breast Surgery, Yue Bei People''s Hospital, Shaoguan City, Guangdong Province, China;2. Department of Gynecology, Yue Bei People''s Hospital, Shaoguan City, Guangdong Province, China;1. Department of Physiotherapy, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain;2. PTinMOTION. Physiotherapy in Motion, Multispeciality Research Group, Department of Physiotherapy, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain;3. Obstetrics and Gynecology Service, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain;4. POG department (pediatrics, obstetrics, and gynecology), Faculty of Medicine, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain;5. Clinical Biomechanics Research Unit (UBIC), Department of Physiotherapy, Universitat de València, València, Spain;1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard University, Boston, MA;2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH;3. Department of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ;4. Department of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ;1. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada;2. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada;3. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada;4. Department of Radiology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada;5. Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada;6. Department of Radiation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | IntroductionBy performing a systematic review and meta-analysis, the diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/MRI in breast lesions, lymph nodes, and distant metastases was assessed, and the merits and demerits of PET/MRI in the application of breast cancer were comprehensively reviewed.MethodsBreast cancer-related studies using 18F-FDG PET/MRI as a diagnostic tool published before September 12, 2022 were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, log diagnostic odds ratio (LDOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated using Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis in a lesion-based and patient-based manner.ResultsWe ultimately included 24 studies (including 1723 patients). Whether on a lesion-based or patient-based analysis, PET/MRI showed superior overall pooled sensitivity (0.95 [95% CI: 0.92-0.98] & 0.93 [95% CI: 0.88-0.98]), specificity (0.94 [95% CI: 0.90-0.97] & 0.94 [95% CI: 0.92-0.97]), LDOR (5.79 [95% CI: 4.95-6.86] & 5.64 [95% CI: 4.58-7.03]) and AUC (0.98 [95% CI: 0.94-0.99] & 0.98[95% CI: 0.92-0.99]) for diagnostic applications in breast cancer. In the specific subgroup analysis, PET/MRI had high pooled sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of breast lesions and distant metastatic lesions and was especially excellent for bone lesions. PET/MRI performed poorly for diagnosing axillary lymph nodes but was better than for lymph nodes at other sites (pooled sensitivity, specificity, LDOR, AUC: 0.86 vs. 0.58, 0.90 vs. 0.82, 4.09 vs. 1.98, 0.89 vs. 0.84).Conclusion18F-FDG PET/MRI performed excellently in diagnosing breast lesions and distant metastases. It can be applied to the initial diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions, accurate staging of breast cancer patients, and accurate restaging of patients with suspected recurrence. |
| |
| Keywords: | PET/MRI diagnostic performance Breast cancer staging |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
