Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, Amsterdam, 1066CX, The Netherlands.
GROW Research Institute for Oncology and Reproduction - Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2024 Dec;52(1):225-236. doi: 10.1007/s00259-024-06860-1. Epub 2024 Aug 14.
In this systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis, we analysed the diagnostic performance of [F]FDG PET/CT in detecting primary tumours in patients with CUP and evaluated whether the location of the predominant metastatic site influences the diagnostic performance.
A systematic literature search from January 2005 to February 2024 was performed to identify articles describing the diagnostic performance of [F]FDG PET/CT for primary tumour detection in CUP. Individual patient data retrieved from original articles or obtained from corresponding authors were grouped by the predominant metastatic site. The diagnostic performance of [F]FDG PET/CT in detecting the underlying primary tumour was compared between predominant metastatic sites.
A total of 1865 patients from 32 studies were included. The largest subgroup included patients with predominant bone metastases (n = 622), followed by liver (n = 369), lymph node (n = 358), brain (n = 316), peritoneal (n = 70), lung (n = 67), and soft tissue (n = 23) metastases, leaving a small group of other/undefined metastases (n = 40). [F]FDG PET/CT resulted in pooled detection rates to identify the primary tumour of 0.74 (for patients with predominant brain metastases), 0.54 (liver-predominant), 0.49 (bone-predominant), 0.46 (lung-predominant), 0.38 (peritoneal-predominant), 0.37 (lymph node-predominant), and 0.35 (soft-tissue-predominant).
This individual patient data meta-analysis suggests that the ability of [F]FDG PET/CT to identify the primary tumour in CUP depends on the distribution of metastatic sites. This finding emphasises the need for more tailored diagnostic approaches in different patient populations. In addition, alternative diagnostic tools, such as new PET tracers or whole-body (PET/)MRI, should be investigated.
在这项系统评价和个体患者数据(IPD)荟萃分析中,我们分析了 [F]FDG PET/CT 在检测 CUP 患者原发肿瘤中的诊断性能,并评估了主要转移部位的位置是否影响诊断性能。
从 2005 年 1 月至 2024 年 2 月进行了系统文献检索,以确定描述 [F]FDG PET/CT 检测 CUP 患者原发肿瘤的诊断性能的文章。从原始文章中检索或从相应作者处获得的个体患者数据按主要转移部位分组。比较 [F]FDG PET/CT 在检测潜在原发肿瘤中的诊断性能。
共有 32 项研究的 1865 名患者纳入本研究。最大的亚组包括主要骨转移患者(n=622),其次是肝转移(n=369)、淋巴结转移(n=358)、脑转移(n=316)、腹膜转移(n=70)、肺转移(n=67)和软组织转移(n=23),其余为其他/未定义转移(n=40)。[F]FDG PET/CT 检测原发肿瘤的总体检出率为 0.74(脑转移为主的患者)、0.54(肝转移为主)、0.49(骨转移为主)、0.46(肺转移为主)、0.38(腹膜转移为主)、0.37(淋巴结转移为主)和 0.35(软组织转移为主)。
这项个体患者数据荟萃分析表明,[F]FDG PET/CT 识别 CUP 患者原发肿瘤的能力取决于转移部位的分布。这一发现强调了在不同患者群体中需要更有针对性的诊断方法。此外,还应研究替代诊断工具,如新型 PET 示踪剂或全身(PET/)MRI。