ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Birim, O.
Right arrow Articles by Bogers, A. J.J.C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Birim, O.
Right arrow Articles by Bogers, A. J.J.C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - cancer
Right arrowRelated Article

Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:375-382
© 2005 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Review

Meta-Analysis of Positron Emission Tomographic and Computed Tomographic Imaging in Detecting Mediastinal Lymph Node Metastases in Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer

Özcan Birim, MDa, A. Pieter Kappetein, MD, PhDa,*, Theo Stijnen, PhDb, Ad J.J.C. Bogers, MD, PhDa

a Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
b Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

* Address reprint requests to Dr Kappetein, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Room BD 156, Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam 3000 CA, the Netherlands (E-mail: a.kappetein{at}erasmusmc.nl).


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
A systematic review was undertaken to select studies that compared the accuracy of 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography with computed tomographic imaging in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer. Two authors selected relevant articles according to predefined criteria. With a meta-analytic method, summary receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed. The point on the receiver operating characteristic curve with equal sensitivity and specificity for 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography was Q* = 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 0.95). For computed tomography it was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.75). The difference was highly significant (p < 0.0001). We conclude that 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is more accurate than computed tomography in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
Lung cancer is the most common cause of death by malignancy in industrialized countries. Approximately only 15% of patients can be cured to enjoy long-term survival. The optimal management of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) depends on the accuracy of appropriate staging strategies. In this regard, chest roentgenograms and computed tomographic (CT) See page 365; for editorial comment, see page 16 images are frequently performed on patients with suspected lung cancer. These diagnostic modalities provide anatomic and morphologic information and are noninvasive, but they are limited in distinguishing between benign and malignant abnormalities. The likelihood of the surgical cure of primary NSCLC is strongly dependent on the local extent of the cancer, particularly whether or not the mediastinal lymph nodes are involved with cancer or whether extrathoracic metastases are present [1]. Therefore, diagnostic evaluation of mediastinal lymph nodes should be accurate. Patients with metastases to the mediastinal lymph nodes have an average 5-year survival rate of approximately 23% as compared with a survival rate of 50% when there is no mediastinal involvement [1]. Dales and colleagues [2] found an overall accuracy of 79% of chest CT imaging in detecting mediastinal metastases. Presently the most accurate method for staging the mediastinal lymph nodes is mediastinoscopy, an invasive procedure that has a sensitivity of approximately 90% for malignant disease [3, 4].

In the last decade, attention has focused on positron emission tomography (PET), a new noninvasive imaging modality using 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG); this method has demonstrated increased glucose metabolism in malignant cells and pulmonary malignancies [5]. The principal mechanism for which it is based was an observation made in 1930. Warburg [6] observed that cancer cells are characterized by higher glycolitic rate than normal cells. The glucose analogue FDG undergoes membrane transport and phosphorylation by hexokinase and is trapped intracellularly. Therefore, intracellular FDG concentration reflects intracellular glucose metabolism and permits differentiation between benign and malignant tissue. The FDG PET imaging is performed in the fasting state to minimize competitive inhibition of FDG uptake by glucose. Several studies have addressed the diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET for detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases, but most studies have enrolled a small numbers of patients. The purpose of this study is to perform a meta-analysis to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET versus CT imaging on detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with NSCLC.


   Material and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
Results
 Comment
 References
 
Study Identification
We attempted to identify all studies that examined functional imaging with FDG PET and CT scanning for diagnosis of mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with NSCLC. Articles were identified by an electronic search of MEDLINE using specific keywords (ie, positron emission tomography, computed tomography, FDG, lung cancer, staging). The references reported in all the identified studies were used for completion of the literature search. When authors reported on the same patient population in several publications, only the most recent or complete study was included in the analysis. Articles by the same author or research group were identified for analysis only when it was obvious that different patient populations had been used. The search ended in January 2003. The following items were searched for in each of these series: number of patients, mean age, design of the study, reference standard, sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET and CT scan.

Study Eligibility
Two investigators (ÖB, APK) independently evaluated potential English language studies for inclusion and subsequently resolved disagreements by discussion. To be eligible for this analysis, reports had to have primary nonsmall cell lung cancer cases only, have enrolled at least 15 patients, have evaluated the correlation of FDG PET and mediastinal lymph node metastases, have evaluated the correlation of CT imaging and mediastinal lymph node metastases, have presented sufficient data to allow calculation of sensitivity and specificity for malignancy, and had to have been published as a full article in the English language peer-reviewed literature. Abstracts were excluded from this analysis because of insufficient data to evaluate the methodological quality and to allow the calculation of sensitivity and specificity.

Study Quality
We designed criteria to assess the quality of the different studies. The trial quality was assessed according to the information provided in the publication. Each trial was read and scored independently by two investigators (ÖB, APK), and disagreements were subsequently resolved by discussion. To identify high-quality studies, we selected criteria for methodological quality from a checklist for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies proposed by the STARD (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy) group [7]. The STARD checklist consists of 25 items. We selected eight general quality criteria covering eight dimensions: (1) descriptions of the study population, (2) cohort assembly, and (3) study design, (4) a clear description of CT technique, (5) a clear description of FDG PET technique, (6) a technical quality of the reference standard, (7) a clear definition of cut-off levels, and (8) interpretation of both FDG PET and CT scans independent of each other and without knowledge of histology. A value between 0 and 2 was attributed to each dimension (2 = adequate and complete description or prospective design, 1 = partial or not optimal description or retrospective design, and 0 = not performed or not mentioned), giving a maximum possible score of 16.

Statistical Analysis
The raw data were summarized according to a method described previously by Irwig and associates [8]. For each study, sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) were calculated from the 2 x 2 tables of true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative results. The DOR is a simple statistic to express the discriminative power of a test. It is defined as the ratio of sensitivity/(1-sensitivity) over (1-specificity)/specificity. In simpler terms, the DOR is the odds of a positive test result if mediastinal lymph nodes are involved with cancer, divided by the odds of a positive test result if mediastinal lymph nodes are free from cancer. A DOR greater than 1 indicates that a test has discriminative power, which increases with the magnitude of the DOR. To prevent division by 0 when calculating the DOR, the conventional correction by adding 0.5 to each cell in the 2 x 2 tables was applied [9]. The DOR was analyzed using a random effect meta-analysis model for the logarithm of the DOR, leading to an overall estimate of the DOR and a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI), taking possible heterogeneity between studies into account [10]. Sensitivity and specificity were analyzed in an analogous way, using the logit transformation.

The models contained study as random factor and did not contain fixed factors, except for a constant. These analyses were carried out with SAS proc mixed as described by van Houwelingen and colleagues [10].

To quantitatively summarize the diagnostic test performance of FDG PET and CT imaging, we also used a meta-analytic method to construct summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves [11, 12]. Receiver operating characteristic curves illustrate the trade-off between sensitivity and specificity as the threshold for defining a positive test that varies from the most stringent to the least stringent. Construction of a summary ROC curve involves calculation of the sum and difference of the logit transforms of the true-positive and false-positive rates for each study [8]. Our method assumes that each individual study represents a unique point on a common ROC curve. To construct the common ROC curves, we applied the equally weighted least squares method described by Moses and colleagues [11]. We defined the maximum joint sensitivity and specificity as the intersection point of the ROC curve and the diagonal line that runs from the top left corner to the bottom right corner of the ROC diagram. This point Q*, at which sensitivity and specificity are equal, is a global measure of test accuracy, similar to the area under the ROC curve. The maximum joint sensitivity and specificity of a perfect test is 1.0, and a maximum joint sensitivity and specificity of a test that has no discriminative ability is 0.5, meaning that probability of correctly identifying disease would be 50%. We calculated Q* and its corresponding standard error by the method described by Moses and colleagues [11]. A larger value of Q* means that the ROC curve tends to be positioned more towards the left upper corner and the better is the test [13, 14]. The analysis was carried out with SPSS.

To assess publication bias, funnel plots were made accompanied by the linear regression test on symmetry [15].


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
Comment
 References
 
Study Identification and Eligibility
Our search identified 49 potentially relevant studies. We excluded 26 studies after scanning their abstracts, including 12 studies written in another language other than English, five studies that evaluated small cell lung cancer, eight review articles, and one study that evaluated not only NSCLC. Twenty-three potentially eligible studies were subsequently appraised. Of these, we excluded six studies because the same patient population as another more recently published article was used [16], because only the accuracy of FDG PET was evaluated [17], because only patients with stage I NSCLC on CT imaging were included [18], because only patients with probable N1-disease were included [19], because there was insufficient data reported to allow the calculation of sensitivity and specificity [20], or because only the number of mediastinal nodal stations examined were reported and not the number of patients [21], respectively. The remaining 17 studies were published between 1994 and 2001 [22–38].

Study Description
The main characteristics of the 17 eligible studies are outlined in Table 1. The total number of patients included was 833, ranging from 18 to 102 patients by report. There were no data reported on age in 11 studies. The sex distribution was only reported in three studies. Five studies evaluated the role of whole-body FDG PET and CT imaging in the staging of NSCLC (pulmonary nodules, lymph node metastases, and distant metastases) [25, 33–36], three studies assessed the role of FDG PET and CT imaging on detecting pulmonary nodules and mediastinal metastases [22, 27, 32], three studies evaluated lymph node metastases [30, 37, 38], and six trials only assessed mediastinal lymph node staging of NSCLC [23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 31]. The patients included in the studies were found operable on CT scan findings if mediastinal lymph nodes were ≤10 mm in diameter. If mediastinal lymph nodes were larger, patients underwent mediastinoscopy before surgery. All patients underwent FDG PET imaging. Histology was confirmed by mediastinoscopy or thoracotomy, or both. Thirty-two patients (in two studies, respectively in 1 and 31 patients [23, 35]) were followed-up with CT scan. Lymph nodes were recorded as pathologic if there was a substantial growth in size. Studies did not report which and how many patients underwent mediastinoscopy on FDG PET findings before thoracotomy. Only six studies [30, 31, 33, 35, 38] described a differentiation between N2 and N3 disease. Two studies [30, 37] reported results by using lymph nodes as the unit of analysis and differentiated between single versus multiple nodes. The results of the remaining studies were reported by using the patient as the unit of analysis.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Studies Comparing 2-[18F]-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography in Mediastinal Lymph Node Staging of Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer
 
Methodological Quality Assessment
The results of the methodological quality assessment for each study are given in Table 2. The overall quality score ranged from 10 to 16 (mean, 14.1). The most poorly described item was the description of the study population. This was particularly caused by the different primary objectives of the studies, of which most did not only evaluate mediastinal lymph node metastases. These trials reported the total study population, but did not report the study population for whom evaluation of mediastinal lymph node metastases was done. No correlation was found between the year of publication and the quality scores.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Methodological Quality Score
 
Diagnostic Accuracy and Meta-Analysis
The sensitivity of FDG PET for detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases ranged from 66% to 100%. The estimate of the overall sensitivity was 83% (95% CI, 77 to 87). Specificity ranged from 81% to 100%, with an overall estimated specificity of 92% (95% CI, 89 to 95). The sensitivity and specificity of CT scan for detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases ranged from 20% to 81% and 44% to 100%, respectively. The overall estimates were 59% (95% CI, 50 to 67) and 78% (95% CI, 70 to 84), respectively. No statistically significant heterogeneity in sensitivity or specificity was detected for both methods. All 17 studies reported a better accuracy of FDG PET when compared with CT imaging in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases, of which the results of 10 trials were considered as statistically significant (0.001 ≤ p < 0.05). Table 1 shows accuracy results expressed in terms of DOR. The DOR ranged from 1.0 to 23.2 for CT imaging, and from 11.5 to 1089.0 for FDG PET. In all studies the DOR was higher for FDG PET than for CT imaging. The overall estimate of the DOR was 5.4 (95% CI, 3.3 to 8.8) for CT imaging and 76.4 (95% CI, 41.2 to 141.7) for FDG PET. For both methods, there was no statistical significant heterogeneity found in the DOR.

The summary ROC curves for the compared diagnostic modalities are shown in Figure 1. The point on the ROC curve with equal sensitivity and specificity for CT imaging was Q* = 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.75) and for FDG PET it was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86 to 0.95). The difference was highly significant (p < 0.0001). Funnel plots and linear regression tests on the symmetry of them did not show evidence of publication bias.



View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 1. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves for FDG PET and CT scan on detecting mediastinal lymph nodes in patients with NSCLC. (CT= computed tomography; FDG = 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose; NSCLC = nonsmall cell lung cancer; PET = positron emission tomography.)

 

   Comment
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
References
 
The correct identification of the extent of disease in NSCLC is a difficult problem for the clinician. Distinguishing between intrapulmonary involvement and mediastinal lymph node involvement is an important part of the process, deciding whether thoracotomy should be performed. Patients without metastatic lymph nodes (N0 disease) or with only intrapulmonary or hilar nodes (N1) are generally considered operable. Those with ipsilateral (N2) or contralateral (N3) metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes have locally advanced disease and are usually not considered for primary surgical treatment. The current noninvasive methods have significant limitations for evaluating the mediastinum and potential extrathoracic metastases. Metastases may be found in 21% of nodes considered normal by imaging criteria [39], and up to 40% of enlarged nodes in some series are not cancerous [2, 40]. In contrast to CT imaging, which is primarily dependent on anatomic imaging features, FDG PET is mainly dependent on the metabolic characteristics of a tissue for assistance in the diagnosis of disease. Because biochemical changes in a tumor will occur before morphologic changes, FDG PET has the potential to monitor the progression of disease before anatomical changes are apparent on conventional imaging techniques. However, because inflammatory cells such as activated macrophages also avidly take up FDG [41], false-positive findings have been reported in active lung diseases such as granulomas, aspergillomas, active tuberculosis, and abscesses [16, 18].

This meta-analysis, which pooled all the studies we found evaluating and comparing the diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET and CT imaging on detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases, showed that FDG PET was more accurate than CT imaging. The high negative predictive value of FDG PET for mediastinal lymph node metastases can be used as an advantage in the approach to patients with NSCLC, because the necessity of invasive procedures can be questioned in a patient with negative findings on FDG PET. However, even with optimal current technology, FDG PET fails to identify microscopic N2 disease; therefore nowadays mediastinoscopy is still warranted in some FDG PET negative patients with certain clinical factors, such as size and location of the tumor, which can be predictive for mediastinal lymph node metastases. A lower positive predictive value of FDG PET, mostly due to inflammatory processes, means that patients in whom mediastinal metastases are found on FDG PET will need to undergo a cervical mediastinoscopy as part of the work-up for NSCLC, to be sure that no single patient with N0 or N1 disease is denied the chance of cure by direct surgical resection based on a false-positive FDG PET.

Dwamena and colleagues [42] stated in their meta-analysis that they found a high accuracy of FDG PET versus CT imaging. However this meta-analysis also included studies evaluating CT scanning only and studies evaluating N1 lymph nodes. Because N1 disease is generally considered operable for treatment decision it is more essential to know whether FDG PET is more accurate to detect N2 or N3 lymph node disease.

In addition to the higher accuracy of FDG PET in detecting mediastinal lymph nodes, it is also accurate in detecting metastatic disease and residual disease after induction therapy. Studies comparing the ability to detect metastases within the liver and adrenal gland demonstrated that FDG PET has a higher sensitivity and specificity than CT scans [43, 44], and it has been found to be superior to bone scintigraphy [45, 46]. Conventional imaging techniques do not provide tumor-specific information. For example, it is difficult to distinguish residual disease from necrosis or fibrotic tissue after induction therapy. The FDG PET has been proven to be more accurate than CT scans in monitoring tumor response to chemotherapy or irradiation [47–49].

The main drawback of FDG PET is the limited ability for precise anatomic localization. Therefore, correlation between the FDG PET images and a recent CT scan of the chest is needed for precise localization of mediastinal lymph nodes. Image registration and image fusion have been used for combining anatomic information from CT scans and metabolic information from FDG PET images [50, 51]. However, computerized fusion of the two types of images currently seemed to be only marginally more beneficial than simple visual correlation of the FDG PET scan and CT imaging in terms of pinpointing metastases in lymph nodes. Whether the benefit of computerized fusion of FDG PET and CT imaging will progress has yet to be proven in further investigation.

Policy-level decisions regarding dissemination of FDG PET must consider not only diagnostic accuracy but also clinical outcome and costs. The high cost is one of the reasons limiting its widespread utilization. Gambhir and coworkers [52] developed a cost to benefit model that demonstrated a significant cost savings by including FDG PET imaging in the staging of lung cancer. They found that a conservative strategy of using chest CT imaging plus FDG PET imaging showed potential cost savings of $1,154 per patient without a loss of life expectancy. This strategy would involve taking biopsy specimens from all positive findings with either CT scan or FDG PET imaging that may indicate nonresectability malignancy so that 100% of surgical candidates are identified definitively. The major cost savings of FDG PET is mainly the result of a patient with unresectable disease who is not undergoing an unnecessary surgery [53].

We attempted to identify all studies that examined functional imaging with FDG PET and CT scans for diagnosis of mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with NSCLC, and we attempted to prevent biases. However all potential biases cannot be prevented. This review was restricted to articles published in English, because other languages such as Japanese or French were not accessible for the readers. This selection could favor the positive studies, as positive studies are often published in English, whereas negative studies, if at all published, tend to be reported in native languages [54].

Another possible source of confusion is the use of the same cohort of patients in different publications. It may be difficult to avoid the same patients being included more than once in the meta-analysis, although publications in which this seems to be the case have to be excluded. We included two publications by Scott and coworkers [22, 26] on different cohorts.

For most studies, the patient was the unit of analysis. For two studies [30, 37], the results were reported by using lymph nodes as the unit of analysis. Analysis of individual lymph nodes can be a source of bias. In these studies, observations are not statistically independent (ie, if a given patient has one positive lymph node, then that patient is more likely to have other positive lymph nodes). In addition, it is important to note that the clinically relevant unit of analysis is the patient, and treatment decisions depend on the presence or absence of lymph node involvement rather than the number of involved nodes.

The fact that mainly operable patients were included in all studies could be a source of work-up bias. In addition, doctors sometimes rely more on the results of the FDG PET scan compared with the CT scan, resulting in more mediastinoscopies performed in patients with a positive FDG PET scan. In all of our studies, no information was given on which and how many patients underwent mediastinoscopy based on FDG PET results before thoracotomy.

The techniques and specialists' reviews that were used to detect mediastinal lymph node metastases may also be potential sources of bias, as nowadays FDG PET scan technology is disseminated to centers with less experience.

In conclusion, our meta-analysis indicates that FDG PET is more accurate than CT imaging for the detection of mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with NSCLC. However, the main drawback of FDG PET is the limited ability for precise anatomic localization. Therefore, correlation between the FDG PET images and a recent CT scan is needed for precise localization of mediastinal lymph nodes. Nowadays, the FDG PET image is not yet able to replace the CT scan as a staging procedure, but it does provide essential additional information. Advances in FDG PET technology, including the refinements of computerized fusion of FDG PET and CT scan, may overcome the limitations in the future. As more accurate staging should lead to more appropriate therapy, FDG PET may lead to improvements in both patient quality of life and in savings of healthcare costs.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 

  1. Mountain CF. Revision of the international system for staging lung cancer Chest 1997;111:1710-1717.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Dales RE, Stark RM, Raman S. Computed tomography to stage lung cancer: approaching a controversy using meta-analysis Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;141:1096-1101.[Medline]
  3. Gdeedo A, van Schil P, Corthouts B, van Mieghem F, van Meerbeeck J, van Marck E. Prospective evaluation of the computed tomography and mediastinoscopy in mediastinal lymph node staging Eur Respir J 1997;10:1547-1551.[Abstract]
  4. van Schil PE, van Hee RH, Schoofs EL. The value of mediastinoscopy in preoperative staging of bronchogenic carcinoma J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1989;97:240-244.[Abstract]
  5. Nolop KB, Rhodes LG, Brudin LH, et al. Glucose utilization in vivo by human pulmonary neoplasm Cancer 1987;60:2682-2689.[Medline]
  6. Warburg O, Wind F, Neglers E. On the metabolism of tumors in the bodyIn: Warburg O, editor. Metabolism of tumors. London: Constable; 1930. pp. 254-270.
  7. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracythe STARD initiative. BMJ 2003;326:41-44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Irwig L, Macaskill P, Glasziou P, Fahey M. Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:119-130.[Medline]
  9. Haldane JBS. The estimation and significance of the logarithm of a ratio of frequencies Ann Hum Genet 1955;48:309-314.
  10. van Houwelingen JC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysismultivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med 2002;21:589-624.[Medline]
  11. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenber B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations Stat Med 1993;12:1293-1316.[Medline]
  12. Owens DK, Holodniy M, Garber AM, et al. Polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of HIV infection in adults: a meta-analysis with recommendations for clinical practice and study design Ann Intern Med 1996;124:803-815.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Hanley JA. Receiver operating characteristics methodology: the state of the art Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1989;29:307-335.[Medline]
  14. Centor RM, Schwartz JS. An evaluation of methods for estimating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve Med Decis Making 1985;5:149-156.
  15. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Scheinder M. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test BMJ 1997;315:629-634.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Gupta NC, Graeber M, Rogers JF, Bishop HA. Comparative efficacy of positron emission tomography with FDG and computed tomographic scanning in preoperative staging of non-small cell lung cancer Ann Surg 1999;229:286-291.[Medline]
  17. Vesselle H, Pugsley JM, Vallières E, Wood DE. The impact of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron-emission tomography on the surgical staging of non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:511-519.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Farrell MA, McAdams HP, Herndon JE, Patz EF. Non-small cell lung cancerFDG PET for nodal staging in patients with stage I disease. Radiology 2000;215:886-890.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, Dupont PJ, et al. FDG-PET scan in potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: Do anatometabolic PET-CT fusion images improve the localisation of regional lymph node metastases? Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:1495-1501.[Medline]
  20. Bury T, Dowlati A, Paulus P, Hustinx R, Radermecker M, Rigo P. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer by whole-body fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:204-206.[Medline]
  21. Patz EF, Lowe VJ, Goodman PC, Herndon J. Thoracic nodal staging with PET imaging with 18FDG in patients with bronchogenic carcinoma Chest 1995;108:1617-1621.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Scott WJ, Schwabe JL, Gupta NC, Dewan NA, Reeb SD, Sugimoto JT. Positron emission tomography of lung tumors and mediastinal lymph nodes using[18F]fluorodeoxyglucose Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58:698-703.[Abstract]
  23. Wahl RL, Quint LE, Greenough RL, Meyer CR, White RI, Orringer MB. Staging of mediastinal non-small cell lung cancer with FDG PET, CT, and fusion images: preliminary prospective evaluation Radiology 1994;191:371-377.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Chin R, Ward R, Keyes JW, et al. Mediasinal staging of non-small cell lung cancer with positron emission tomography Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152:2090-2096.[Abstract]
  25. Valk PE, Pounds TR, Hopkins DM, et al. Staging non-small cell lung cancer by whole-body positron emission tomographic imaging Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:1573-1582.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Scott WJ, Gobar LS, Terry JD, Dewan NA, Sunderland JJ. Mediastinal lymph node staging of non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective comparison of computed tomography and positron emission tomography J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996;111:642-648.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Sazon DAD, Santiago SM, Soo Hoo GW, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of lung cancer Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;153:417-421.[Abstract]
  28. Sasaki M, Ichiya Y, Kuwabara Y, et al. The usefulness of FDG positron emission tomography for the detection of mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancera comparative study with X-ray computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:741-747.[Medline]
  29. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, De Leyn PR, et al. Mediastinal lymph node staging with FDG-PET scan in patients with potentially operable non-small cell lung cancera prospective analysis of 50 cases. Chest 1997;112:1480-1486.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Steinert HC, Hauser M, Allemann F, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling Radiology 1997;202:441-446.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Guhlmann A, Storck M, Kotzerke J, Moog F, Sunder-Plassmann L, Reske RN. Lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancerevaluation by [18F] FDG positron emission tomography (PET). Thorax 1997;52:438-441.[Abstract]
  32. Hagberg RC, Segall GM, Stark P, Burdon TA, Pompili MF. Characterization of pulmonary nodules and mediastinal staging of bronchogenic carcinoma with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997;12:92-97.[Abstract]
  33. Bury T, Dowlati A, Paulus P, et al. Whole-body 18FDG positron emission tomography in the staging of non-small cell lung cancer Eur Respir J 1997;10:2529-2534.[Abstract]
  34. Saunders CAB, Dussek JE, O'Doherty MJ, Maisey MN. Evaluation of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose whole body positron emission tomography imaging in the staging of lung cancer Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67:790-797.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Marom EM, McAdams HP, Erasmus JJ, et al. Staging non-small cell lung cancer with whole-body PET Radiology 1999;212:803-809.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Pieterman RM, van Putten JWG, Meuzelaar JJ, et al. Preoperative staging of non-small cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography N Eng J Medy 2000;343:254-261.
  37. Gupta NC, Graeber GF, Bishop HA. Comparative efficacy of positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose in evaluation of small (<1 cm), intermediate (1 to 3 cm), and large (>3 cm) lymph node lesions Chest 2000;117:773-778.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Poncelet AJ, Lonneux M, Coche E, Weynand B, Noirhomme Ph. PET-FDG scan enhances but does not replace preoperative surgical staging in non-small cell lung cancer Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:468-475.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Arita T, Kuramitsu T, Kawamura M, et al. Bronchogenic carcinoma: incidence of metastases to normal sized lymph nodes Thorax 1995;50:1267-1269.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Arita T, Matsumoto T, Kuramitsu T, et al. Is it possible to differentiate malignant mediastinal nodes from benign nodes by size? Reevaluation by CT, transesophageal echocardiography, and nodal specimen Chest 1996;110:1004-1008.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Gupta NC, Frank AR, Dewan NA, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: detection of malignancy with PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose Radiology 1992;184:441-444.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Dwamena BA, Sonnad SS, Angobaldo JO, Wahl RL. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT Radiology 1999;213:530-536.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Valk PE, Pounds TR, Hopkins DM, et al. Staging non-small cell lung cancer by whole-body positron emission tomographic imaging Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:1573-1582.
  44. Erasmus JJ, Patz EF, McAdams HP, et al. Evaluation of adrenal masses in patients with bronchogenic carcinoma using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography Am J Radiol 1997;168:1357-1362.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Marom EM, McAdams HP, Erasmus JJ, et al. Staging non-small cell lung cancer with whole-body PET Radiology 1999;212:803-809.
  46. Bury T, Barreto A, Daenen F, Barthelemy N, Ghaye B, Rigo P. Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the detection of bone metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:1244-1247.[Medline]
  47. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, De Leyn PR, Dupont PJ, Verbeken EK, The Leuven lung cancer group Potential use of FDG-PET scan after induction chemotherapy in surgically staged IIIa-N2 non-small-cell lung cancera prospective pilot study. Ann Oncol 1998;9:1193-1198.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Akhurst T, Downey RJ, Ginsberg MS, et al. An initial experience with FDG-PET in the imaging of residual disease after induction therapy for lung cancer Ann Thorac Surg 2002;73:259-266.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Cerfolio RJ, Ojha B, Mukherjee S, Pask AH, Bass CS, Katholi CR. Positron emission tomography scanning with 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose as a predictor of response of neoadjuvant treatment for non-small cell lung carcinoma J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:938-944.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, Dupont PJ, et al. FDG-PET scan in potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: Do anatometabolic PET-CT fusion images improve the localisation of regional lymph node metastases? Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:1495-1501.
  51. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integraded positron-emission tomography and computed tomography N Eng J Med 2003;348:2500-2507.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  52. Gambhir SS, Hoh CK, Phelps ME, Madar I, Maddahi J. Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in the staging and management of non-small cell lung carcinoma J Nucl Med 1996;37:1428-1436.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  53. Verboom P, van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancerthe PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1444-1449.[Medline]
  54. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomized controlled trials published in English and German Lancet 1997;350:326-329.[Medline]

Related Article

Is Virtual Bronchoscopy an Efficient Diagnostic Tool for the Thoracic Surgeon?
Catherine M. Jones and Thanos Athanasiou
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2005 79: 365-374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Kligerman and S. Digumarthy
Staging of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using Integrated PET/CT
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2009; 193(5): 1203 - 1211.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
L. Varela-Lema, A. Fernandez-Villar, and A. Ruano-Ravina
Effectiveness and safety of endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration: a systematic review
Eur. Respir. J., May 1, 2009; 33(5): 1156 - 1164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
G. Melloni, M. Casiraghi, A. Bandiera, P. Ciriaco, A. Carretta, L. Libretti, and P. Zannini
Transbronchial needle aspiration in lung cancer patients suitable for operation with positive mediastinal positron emission tomography.
Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2009; 87(2): 373 - 378.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
W. De Wever, S. Stroobants, J. Coolen, and J. A. Verschakelen
Integrated PET/CT in the staging of nonsmall cell lung cancer: technical aspects and clinical integration
Eur. Respir. J., January 1, 2009; 33(1): 201 - 212.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
S. S. Groth, B. A. Whitson, J. D'Cunha, M. A. Maddaus, M. Alsharif, and R. S. Andrade
Endobronchial Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Mediastinal Lymph Nodes: A Single Institution's Early Learning Curve
Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2008; 86(4): 1104 - 1110.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
F.-X. Hanin, M. Lonneux, J. Cornet, P. Noirhomme, C. Coulon, J. Distexhe, and A. J. Poncelet
Prognostic value of FDG uptake in early stage non-small cell lung cancer
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2008; 33(5): 819 - 823.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNMHome page
J. W. Fletcher, B. Djulbegovic, H. P. Soares, B. A. Siegel, V. J. Lowe, G. H. Lyman, R. E. Coleman, R. Wahl, J. C. Paschold, N. Avril, et al.
Recommendations on the Use of 18F-FDG PET in Oncology
J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2008; 49(3): 480 - 508.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
H. Melek, M. Z. Gunluoglu, A. Demir, H. Akin, A. Olcmen, and S. I. Dincer
Role of positron emission tomography in mediastinal lymphatic staging of non-small cell lung cancer
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 2008; 33(2): 294 - 299.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
Y. C. Ung, D. E. Maziak, J. A. Vanderveen, C. A. Smith, K. Gulenchyn, C. Lacchetti, W. K. Evans, and Lung Cancer Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Onta
18Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in the Diagnosis and Staging of Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
J Natl Cancer Inst, December 5, 2007; 99(23): 1753 - 1767.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNMHome page
D. Hellwig, T. P. Graeter, D. Ukena, A. Groeschel, G. W. Sybrecht, H.-J. Schaefers, and C.-M. Kirsch
18F-FDG PET for Mediastinal Staging of Lung Cancer: Which SUV Threshold Makes Sense?
J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2007; 48(11): 1761 - 1766.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ThoraxHome page
F. C Detterbeck
Evolution and science, progress and change
Thorax, August 1, 2007; 62(8): 654 - 655.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
P. De Leyn, D. Lardinois, P. E. Van Schil, R. Rami-Porta, B. Passlick, M. Zielinski, D. A. Waller, T. Lerut, and W. Weder
ESTS guidelines for preoperative lymph node staging for non-small cell lung cancer
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., July 1, 2007; 32(1): 1 - 8.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
B. E. Lee, D. von Haag, T. Lown, D. Lau, R. Calhoun, and D. Follette
Advances in positron emission tomography technology have increased the need for surgical staging in non-small cell lung cancer
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2007; 133(3): 746 - 752.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
F. J. F. Herth, A. Ernst, R. Eberhardt, P. Vilmann, H. Dienemann, and M. Krasnik
Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration of lymph nodes in the radiologically normal mediastinum
Eur. Respir. J., November 1, 2006; 28(5): 910 - 914.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ICVTSHome page
C. Schimmer, K. Neukam, and O. Elert
Staging of non-small cell lung cancer: clinical value of positron emission tomography and mediastinoscopy
Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, August 1, 2006; 5(4): 418 - 423.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
P. Goldstraw
Selection of Patients for Surgery After Induction Chemotherapy for N2 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., July 20, 2006; 24(21): 3317 - 3318.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
P. De Leyn, S. Stroobants, W. De Wever, T. Lerut, W. Coosemans, G. Decker, P. Nafteux, D. Van Raemdonck, L. Mortelmans, K. Nackaerts, et al.
Prospective Comparative Study of Integrated Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography Scan Compared With Remediastinoscopy in the Assessment of Residual Mediastinal Lymph Node Disease After Induction Chemotherapy for Mediastinoscopy-Proven Stage IIIA-N2 Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Leuven Lung Cancer Group Study
J. Clin. Oncol., July 20, 2006; 24(21): 3333 - 3339.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
D. Lardinois
New Horizons in Staging for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., April 20, 2006; 24(12): 1785 - 1787.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
J. L. Port, R. S. Andrade, M. A. Levin, R. J. Korst, P. C. Lee, D. E. Becker, and N. K. Altorki
Positron emission tomographic scanning in the diagnosis and staging of non-small cell lung cancer 2 cm in size or less
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2005; 130(6): 1611 - 1615.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
O. Birim, A. P. Kappetein, and A. J.J.C. Bogers
Reply
Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2005; 80(5): 1980 - 1981.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
F. C. Detterbeck
Relearning the Lessons of the Past: Are We Making Progress?
Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2005; 80(5): 1979 - 1980.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Birim, O.
Right arrow Articles by Bogers, A. J.J.C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Birim, O.
Right arrow Articles by Bogers, A. J.J.C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - cancer
Right arrowRelated Article

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS