Accuracy of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the diagnosis and restaging for recurrent ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 598-607

  Limei, Zhao ^a   Yong, Chen ^a   Yan, Xu ^a   Shuai, Tang ^a   Jiangyan, Xie ^a   Zhiqing, Liang ^a  

^a THIRD MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Diagnosis; Ovarian carcinoma; Positron emission tomography combination with computed tomography; Recurrence; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COCHRANE LIBRARY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; OVARY CANCER; OVARY CARCINOMA; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENT CANCER; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

CARCINOMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84879894695     PISSN: 1048891X     EISSN: 15251438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e31828a183c     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Banerjee S, Kaye S. The role of targeted therapy in ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:S116-S130.
2. Karantanis D, Allen-Auerbach M, Czernin J. Relationship among glycolytic phenotype, grade, and histological subtype in ovarian carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:49-53.
3. Gu MJ, Shi W. Current research and management of ovarian cancer in China. Chinese-German J Clin Oncol. 2002;1:212-218.
4. Gentry-Maharaj A, Menon U. Screening for ovarian cancer in the general population. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;26:243-256.
5. Damak T, Chargui R, Ben Hassouna J, et al. Results of second-look laparotomy in advanced ovarian cancer: one single center experience. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;2012:849518.
6. Murakami M, Miyamoto T, Iida T, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography and tumor marker CA125 for detection of recurrence in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16:99-107.
7. Brooks RA, Powell MA. Novel imaging modalities in gynecologic cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2009;11:466-472.
8. Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, et al. Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116:389-394.
9. Prakash P, Cronin CG, Blake MA. Role of PET/CT in ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:W464-W470.
10. Son H, Khan SM, Rahaman J, et al. Role of FDG PET/CT in staging of recurrent ovarian cancer. Radiographics. 2011;31:569-583.
11. Markman M. PET/CT scans in ovarian cancer: prognostic versus predictive utility? Minerva Med. 2009;100:415-420.
12. Chung HH, Kwon HW, Kang KW, et al. Preoperative [F]FDG PET/CT predicts recurrence in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2012;23:28-34.
13. Lijmer JG, MolBW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061-1066.
14. Medeiros LR, Freitas LB, Rosa DD, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in ovarian tumor: a systematic quantitative review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204:67.
15. Phillips B. Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Level of Evidence Grades of Recommendations. May 4, 2001. Available at: www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o= 1025. Accessed Aprial 14, 2012.
16. Altman DG. Relation between two continuous variables. In: Altman DG, ed. Practical Statistics for Medical Research. 9 ed. London: Chapman; 1999:277-299.
17. Deeks JJ. Systematic reviews of evaluation of diagnostic and screening tests. In: Egger M, Smith GD, Altman D, eds. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Publishing; 2001:248-282.
18. Wu LM, Chen FY, Jiang XX, et al. 18F-FDG PET, combined FDG-PET/CT and MRI for evaluation of bone marrow infiltration in staging of lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:303-311.
19. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, et al. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:31.
20. Antunovic L, Cimitan M, Borsatti E, et al. Revisiting the clinical value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detection of recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinomas: correlation with histology, serum CA-125 assay, and conventional radiological modalities. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:e184-e188.
21. Kitajima K, Ueno Y, Suzuki K, et al. Low-dose non-enhanced CT versus full-dose contrast-enhanced CT in integrated PET/CT scans for diagnosing ovarian cancer recurrence. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:3557-3562.
22. Sari O, Kaya B, Kara PO, et al. The role of FDG-PET/CT in ovarian cancer patients with high tumor markers or suspicious lesion on contrast-enhanced CT in evaluation of recurrence and/or in determination of intraabdominal metastases. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2012;31:3-8.
23. Sanli Y, Turkmen C, Bakir B, et al. Diagnostic value of PET/CT is similar to that of conventional MRI and even better for detecting small peritoneal implants in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:509-515.
24. Nasu K, Abe W, Takai N, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma after treatment. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283:1121-1126.
25. Palomar A, Nanni C, Castellucci P, et al. Value of FDG PET/CT in patients with treated ovarian cancer and raised CA125 serum levels. Mol Imaging Biol. 2012;14:123-129.
26. Pan HS, Lee SL, Huang LW, et al. Combined positron emission tomography-computed tomography and tumor markers for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283:335-341.
27. Peng NJ, Liou WS, Liu RS, et al. Early detection of recurrent ovarian cancer in patients with low-level increases in serum CA-125 levels by 2-[F-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2011;26:175-181.
28. Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Wei W, et al. Clinical utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer in the setting of normal CA-125 levels. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:936-944.
29. Bilici A, Ustaalioglu BB, Seker M, et al. Clinical value of FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: is there an impact of FDG PET/CT on patient management? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1259-1269.
30. Risum S, Høgdall C, Markova E, et al. Influence of 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography on recurrent ovarian cancer diagnosis and on selection of patients for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:600-604.