Impact of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on management of cancer of unknown primary: systematic review and meta-analysis

Cancers of unknown primary (CUP) have traditionally been treated empirically, with a dismal prognosis. Compared with standard diagnostic tests, including CT and MRI, imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET or PET/CT has shown the capacity to better identify the primary tumour site and detect a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of cancer (1990) 2021-12, Vol.159, p.60-77
Hauptverfasser: Woo, Sungmin, Becker, Anton S., Do, Richard K.G., Schöder, Heiko, Hricak, Hedvig, Alberto Vargas, H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Cancers of unknown primary (CUP) have traditionally been treated empirically, with a dismal prognosis. Compared with standard diagnostic tests, including CT and MRI, imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET or PET/CT has shown the capacity to better identify the primary tumour site and detect additional sites of metastasis. However, its clinical impact is not well established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prior studies to assess the impact of FDG-PET or PET/CT on the management of patients with CUP. Pubmed and EMBASE databases were searched up to 4th February 2021. Studies that reported the proportion of patients with CUP who experienced a management change after FDG-PET or PET/ computed tomography (CT) were included and the proportions were pooled using the random-effects model. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. Subgroup analysis was conducted to explore heterogeneity. Thirty-eight studies (involving 2795 patients) were included. The pooled proportion of patients with management changes was 35% (95% confidence interval 31%–40%). There was substantial heterogeneity among the studies (Q-test, p 
ISSN:0959-8049
1879-0852
DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2021.09.031