Accuracy of 18-F Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomographic/Computed Tomographic Imaging in Primary Staging of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity

Linz, Christian; Brands, Roman C.; Herterich, Theresia; Hartmann, Stefan; Müller‐Richter, Urs; Kübler, Alexander C.; Haug, Lukas; Kertels, Olivia; Bley, Thorsten Alexander; Dierks, Alexander; Buck, Andreas K.; Lapa, Constantin; Brumberg, Joachim

doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7083

Cited by 24 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2020 16 Park et al 2020 17 Sarma et al 2021 18 Linz et al 2021 19 Type of study and p-value of 0.0013. We obtained the pooled sensitivity of 91.7%, pooled specificity of 92.35%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.27%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 91.13%, the positive likelihood ratio of 7.45, negative likelihood ratio of 0.28, disease prevalence of 95.8%, and accuracy of 91.5%, as reported in Table 3.…”

Section: Meta-analysis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, because of the high sensitivity and specificity of 18 F-FDG PET for cellular change and tumors, its use is highly recommended in various studies due to its high sensitivity in detecting perineural spread and recurrent metastatic tumors. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] For example, Linz et al reported the sensitivity of 18 F-FDG PET as 78.6% and specificity as 83.1%. 19 Similarly, Sherif et al reported a high sensitivity of 83.33% and specificity of 89.47%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Demographic summary of the patients and event data of the included studies are summarized in Table 1. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Two authors (XN and JZ) scanned the relevant sources for related studies separately. Mainly, the full-texts articles of the sources were collected, and abstracts were used to obtain sufficient information for the meta-analysis.…”

Section: Search Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among these, the use of 18 F-FDG PET (PET with 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG)) is highly recommended in various studies due to its high sensitivity for detecting perineural spread and recurrent metastatic tumors. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] For example, Schroeder et al reported that MRI and 18 F-FDG PET have identical detection rates of recurrent metastatic tumors. 16 Similarly, Lee et al reported that the application of 18 F-FDG PET in clinical diagnosis could enhance the tumor detection rate in head and neck cancers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Does PET scan have any role in the diagnosis of perineural spread associated with the head and neck tumors?

Nie¹,

Zhou²,

Zeng³

et al. 2022

Adv Clin Exp Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Perineural spread of head and neck tumors is linked to a worse chance of survival as well as a higher risk of local recurrence and metastasis. Particle emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) using 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG) is part of the work-up and follow-up of many afflicted patients, and radiologists play an essential role in the assessment and management of head and neck cancer.Objectives. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of 18 F-FDG PET in detecting perineural spread among patients with head and neck tumors through a meta-analysis. Materials and methods.Relevant articles were searched using appropriate keywords from PubMed, MEDLINE and PubMed Central (PMC) databases. Retrospective and prospective studies were included as per the predefined PICOS criteria. Demographic summary and event data for diagnostic accuracy of 18 F-FDG PET were determined, and odds ratio (OR), sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and predictive values were calculated using RevMan software. The bias risk was analyzed with Egger's and Begg's tests using MedCalc software. Results.Fourteen clinical trials performed between 2000 and 2021, with 977 head and neck cancer patients with perineural spread, were included according to the inclusion criteria. Included studies used 18 F-FDG PET imaging of tumors and reported its high sensitivity. In the current study, we obtained the pooled OR = 3.088 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): [1.486; 6.419]), pooled sensitivity of 91.7%, pooled specificity of 92.35%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.27%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 91. 13%, positive likelihood ratio of 7.45, negative likelihood ratio of 0.28, disease prevalence of 95.8%, and accuracy of 91.5%. Data was heterogeneous, with Q value of 33.8%, degrees of freedom (df) value of 13, I 2 value of 61.5% (31.23-78.5), and p-value = 0.0013. The risk of publication bias was low, with a p = 0.7490 (Egger's test) and p = 0.7843 (Begg's test).Conclusions. The present meta-analysis highly recommends 18 F-FDG PET as an effective imaging method for patients with head and neck tumors with perineural spread.

show abstract

Section: Meta-analysis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Search Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does PET scan have any role in the diagnosis of perineural spread associated with the head and neck tumors?

Nie¹,

Zhou²,

Zeng³

et al. 2022

Adv Clin Exp Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, it can be used to identify an unknown primary in the presence of neck lymphadenopathy and no obvious primary site on MRI or CT. Although PET-CT imaging has a high negative-predictive value [ 72 ], it can have false positives, as in the case of the inflammatory processes. The positive-predictive value is reported in the order of 50% [ 73 ].…”

Section: Quantitative Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative and Quantitative Diagnosis in Head and Neck Cancer

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The diagnosis is the art of determining the nature of a disease, and an accurate diagnosis is the true cornerstone on which rational treatment should be built. Within the workflow in the management of head and neck tumours, there are different types of diagnosis. The purpose of this work is to point out the differences and the aims of the different types of diagnoses and to highlight their importance in the management of patients with head and neck tumours. Qualitative diagnosis is performed by a pathologist and is essential in determining the management and can provide guidance on prognosis. The evolution of immunohistochemistry and molecular biology techniques has made it possible to obtain more precise diagnoses and to identify prognostic markers and precision factors. Quantitative diagnosis is made by the radiologist and consists of identifying a mass lesion and the estimation of the tumour volume and extent using imaging techniques, such as CT, MRI, and PET. The distinction between the two types of diagnosis is clear, as the methodology is different. The accurate establishment of both diagnoses plays an essential role in treatment planning. Getting the right diagnosis is a key aspect of health care, and it provides an explanation of a patient’s health problem and informs subsequent decision. Deep learning and radiomics approaches hold promise for improving diagnosis.

show abstract

A preoperative nomogram model for the prediction of lymph node metastasis in buccal mucosa cancer

Chen

Wei

2023

Cancer Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:We sought to construct a nomogram model predicting lymph node metastasis (LNM) in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the buccal mucosa based on preoperative clinical characteristics. Methods:Patients who underwent radical resection of a primary tumor in the buccal mucosa with neck dissection were enrolled. Clinical characteristics independently associated with LNM in multivariate analyses were adopted to build the model. Patients at low risk of LNM were defined by a predicted probability of LNM of less than 5%. Results: Patients who underwent surgery in an earlier period (January 2015-November 2019) were defined as the model development cohort (n = 325), and those who underwent surgery later (November 2019-March 2021) were defined as the validation cohort (n = 140). Age, tumor differentiation, tumor thickness, and clinical N stage assessed by computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (cN) were independent predictors of LNM. The nomogram model based on these four predictors showed good discrimination accuracy in both the model development and validation cohorts, with areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.814 and 0.828, respectively. LNM prediction by the nomogram model was superior to cN in AUC comparisons (0.815 vs. 0.753) and decision curve analysis of the whole cohort. Seventy-one patients were defined as having a low risk of LNM, among whom the actual metastasis rate was only 1.4%. Conclusions: A robust nomogram model for preoperative LNM prediction is built.

show abstract

Accuracy of 18-F Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomographic/Computed Tomographic Imaging in Primary Staging of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity

Cited by 24 publications

References 45 publications

Does PET scan have any role in the diagnosis of perineural spread associated with the head and neck tumors?

Does PET scan have any role in the diagnosis of perineural spread associated with the head and neck tumors?

Qualitative and Quantitative Diagnosis in Head and Neck Cancer

A preoperative nomogram model for the prediction of lymph node metastasis in buccal mucosa cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About