Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Li, Zhiwei [verfasserIn] Sun, Dianhan [verfasserIn] Li, Anying [verfasserIn] Shu, Yusheng [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Clinical and translational imaging - Springer International Publishing, 2013, 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:12 ; year:2024 ; number:4 ; day:23 ; month:02 ; pages:413-421 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR056945256 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR056945256 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240813064816.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240813s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR056945256 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 100 | 1 | |a Li, Zhiwei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. | ||
| 520 | |a Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a [ |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a F]FDG PET/CT |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a [ |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a F]FDG PET/MRI |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a NSCLC |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a TNM staging |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sun, Dianhan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Anying |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shu, Yusheng |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical and translational imaging |d Springer International Publishing, 2013 |g 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 |w (DE-627)742738752 |w (DE-600)2712000-4 |x 2281-7565 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:12 |g year:2024 |g number:4 |g day:23 |g month:02 |g pages:413-421 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |m X:SPRINGER |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_0 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2018 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2472 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4328 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 12 |j 2024 |e 4 |b 23 |c 02 |h 413-421 | ||
| author_variant |
z l zl d s ds a l al y s ys |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:22817565:2024----::edoedoprsnf8fgemin1fdpttotmtgninnmlcllncnea |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2024 |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 doi (DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Li, Zhiwei verfasserin aut Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sun, Dianhan verfasserin aut Li, Anying verfasserin aut Shu, Yusheng verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 aut Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging Springer International Publishing, 2013 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 (DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 2281-7565 nnns volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2024 4 23 02 413-421 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 doi (DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Li, Zhiwei verfasserin aut Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sun, Dianhan verfasserin aut Li, Anying verfasserin aut Shu, Yusheng verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 aut Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging Springer International Publishing, 2013 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 (DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 2281-7565 nnns volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2024 4 23 02 413-421 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 doi (DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Li, Zhiwei verfasserin aut Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sun, Dianhan verfasserin aut Li, Anying verfasserin aut Shu, Yusheng verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 aut Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging Springer International Publishing, 2013 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 (DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 2281-7565 nnns volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2024 4 23 02 413-421 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 doi (DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Li, Zhiwei verfasserin aut Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sun, Dianhan verfasserin aut Li, Anying verfasserin aut Shu, Yusheng verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 aut Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging Springer International Publishing, 2013 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 (DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 2281-7565 nnns volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2024 4 23 02 413-421 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 doi (DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ Li, Zhiwei verfasserin aut Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 [ (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sun, Dianhan verfasserin aut Li, Anying verfasserin aut Shu, Yusheng verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 aut Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging Springer International Publishing, 2013 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 (DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 2281-7565 nnns volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 X:SPRINGER Resolving-System lizenzpflichtig Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 12 2024 4 23 02 413-421 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Clinical and translational imaging 12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421 volume:12 year:2024 number:4 day:23 month:02 pages:413-421 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
[ F]FDG PET/CT F]FDG PET/MRI NSCLC TNM staging Meta-Analysis |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Clinical and translational imaging |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Li, Zhiwei @@aut@@ Sun, Dianhan @@aut@@ Li, Anying @@aut@@ Shu, Yusheng @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2024-02-23T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
742738752 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
SPR056945256 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR056945256</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240813064816.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240813s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR056945256</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Zhiwei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">[</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">F]FDG PET/CT</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">[</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">F]FDG PET/MRI</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">NSCLC</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">TNM staging</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-Analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sun, Dianhan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Anying</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shu, Yusheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical and translational imaging</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer International Publishing, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)742738752</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2712000-4</subfield><subfield code="x">2281-7565</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:413-421</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">02</subfield><subfield code="h">413-421</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Li, Zhiwei |
| spellingShingle |
Li, Zhiwei ddc 610 misc [ misc F]FDG PET/CT misc F]FDG PET/MRI misc NSCLC misc TNM staging misc Meta-Analysis Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| authorStr |
Li, Zhiwei |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)742738752 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
2281-7565 |
| topic_title |
610 VZ Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/CT (dpeaa)DE-He213 F]FDG PET/MRI (dpeaa)DE-He213 NSCLC (dpeaa)DE-He213 TNM staging (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
ddc 610 misc [ misc F]FDG PET/CT misc F]FDG PET/MRI misc NSCLC misc TNM staging misc Meta-Analysis |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 misc [ misc F]FDG PET/CT misc F]FDG PET/MRI misc NSCLC misc TNM staging misc Meta-Analysis |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 misc [ misc F]FDG PET/CT misc F]FDG PET/MRI misc NSCLC misc TNM staging misc Meta-Analysis |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Clinical and translational imaging |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
742738752 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Clinical and translational imaging |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)742738752 (DE-600)2712000-4 |
| title |
Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR056945256 (SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e |
| title_full |
Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| author_sort |
Li, Zhiwei |
| journal |
Clinical and translational imaging |
| journalStr |
Clinical and translational imaging |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2024 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
413 |
| author_browse |
Li, Zhiwei Sun, Dianhan Li, Anying Shu, Yusheng |
| container_volume |
12 |
| class |
610 VZ |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Li, Zhiwei |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-4166-1580 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
head-to-head comparison of [18f]fdg pet/mri and [18f] fdg pet/ct for tnm staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_auth |
Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| abstract |
Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. |
| abstractGer |
Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. |
| collection_details |
SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
4 |
| title_short |
Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Sun, Dianhan Li, Anying Shu, Yusheng |
| author2Str |
Sun, Dianhan Li, Anying Shu, Yusheng |
| ppnlink |
742738752 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7 |
| up_date |
2024-08-13T04:50:12.297Z |
| _version_ |
1807246543866036224 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR056945256</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240813064816.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240813s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR056945256</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40336-024-00622-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Zhiwei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Head-to-head comparison of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F] FDG PET/CT for TNM staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2024. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and [18F]FDG PET/ computed tomography (CT) in tumor–node–metastasis staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines and retrieved all accessible studies from the Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases up to December 2022. Only studies in which both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and [18F]FDG PET/CT were conducted on each individual patient were included. Two researchers independently extracted data on study characteristics and assessed the methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Results A total of 539 patients in eight studies were included in this analysis. For T staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET/CT was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.89–1.00), with corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.87–0.99), respectively. For N staging, the pooled sensitivity of [18F] FDG PET/CT was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63–0.76), the specificity of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.90 (standard error [SE] = 0.06). The corresponding values for [18F]FDG PET/MRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65–0.77), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and 0.88 (SE = 0.06), respectively. For M staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.62–0.91), the specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97), and AUC was 0.96 (SE = 0.03) for [18F]FDG PET/CT. The corresponding values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93–0.98), and 0.94 (SE = 0.03), respectively, for [18F]FDG PET/MRI. Conclusions According to the pooled data, [18F]FDG PET/CT performed slightly better in terms of T staging than [18F]FDG PET/MRI. In contrast, with regard to N staging and M staging the staging accuracy of both imaging techniques was comparable. To ensure that results are reliable, more high-level investigations will be required to assess these imaging modalities, in addition to optimized PET/MRI procedures.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">[</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">F]FDG PET/CT</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">[</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">F]FDG PET/MRI</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">NSCLC</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">TNM staging</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-Analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sun, Dianhan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Anying</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shu, Yusheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-4166-1580</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical and translational imaging</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer International Publishing, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">12(2024), 4 vom: 23. Feb., Seite 413-421</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)742738752</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2712000-4</subfield><subfield code="x">2281-7565</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:12</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:02</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:413-421</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-024-00622-7</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">12</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">02</subfield><subfield code="h">413-421</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.401184 |