Diagnostic Accuracy of PET for Recurrent Glioma Diagnosis: A Meta-Analysis

References

1. 1.↵
   CBTRUS Statistical Report: Primary Brain and Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2011; 2004–2007. http://www.cbtrus.org/2011-NPCR-SEER/WEB-0407-Report-3–3-2011.pdf. Accessed October 3, 2012.
2. 2.↵
   1. Wen PY,
   2. Kesari S

   . Malignant gliomas in adults. N Engl J Med 2008;359:492–507

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   National Cancer Comprehensive Network. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Central Nervous System Cancers. Version 2.2011. 2011. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp. Accessed on September 22, 2011.
4. 4.↵
   1. Stupp R,
   2. Tonn JC,
   3. Brada M,
   4. et al

   . High-grade malignant glioma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2010;21:v190–v193

   FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Soffietti R,
   2. Baumert BG,
   3. Bello L,
   4. et al

   . Guidelines on management of low-grade gliomas: report of an EFNS-EANO* Task Force. Eur J Neurol 2010;17:1124–33

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Brandsma D,
   2. Stalpers L,
   3. Taal W,
   4. et al

   . Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:453–61

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Wen PY,
   2. Macdonald DR,
   3. Reardon DA,
   4. et al

   . Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1963–72

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. la Fougère C,
   2. Suchorska B,
   3. Bartenstein P,
   4. et al

   . Molecular imaging of gliomas with PET: opportunities and limitations. Neuro-oncology 2011;13:806–19

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Dhermain FG,
   2. Hau P,
   3. Lanfermann H,
   4. et al

   . Advanced MRI and PET imaging for assessment of treatment response in patients with gliomas. Lancet Neurol 2010;9:906–20

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Heiss WD,
    2. Raab P,
    3. Lanfermann H

    . Multimodality assessment of brain tumors and tumor recurrence. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1585–600

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Whiting P,
    2. Rutjes AW,
    3. Reitsma JB,
    4. et al

    . The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Whiting PF,
    2. Weswood ME,
    3. Rutjes AW,
    4. et al

    . Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:9

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Reitsma JB,
    2. Glas AS,
    3. Rutjes AW,
    4. et al

    . Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:982–90

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Chu H,
    2. Cole SR

    . Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:1331–32

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Harbord RM,
    2. Deeks JJ,
    3. Egger M,
    4. et al

    . A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics 2007;8:239–51

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Janus TJ,
    2. Kim EE,
    3. Tilbury R,
    4. et al

    . Use of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with primary malignant brain tumors. Ann Neurol 1993;33:540–48

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Kahn D,
    2. Follett KA,
    3. Bushnell DL,
    4. et al

    . Diagnosis of recurrent brain tumor: value of 201Tl SPECT vs 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;163:1459–65

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Nelson SJ,
    2. Day MR,
    3. Buffone PJ,
    4. et al

    . Alignment of volume MR images and high resolution [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET images for the evaluation of patients with brain tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997;21:183–91

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    1. Ricci PE,
    2. Karis JP,
    3. Heiserman JE,
    4. et al

    . Differentiating recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis: time for re-evaluation of positron emission tomography? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998;19:407–13

    Abstract
20. 20.↵
    1. Sonoda Y,
    2. Kumabe T,
    3. Takahashi T,
    4. et al

    . Clinical usefulness of 11C-MET PET and 201T1 SPECT for differentiation of recurrent glioma from radiation necrosis. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 1998;38:342–47, discussion 347–48

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Bader JB,
    2. Samnick S,
    3. Moringlane JR,
    4. et al

    . Evaluation of l-3-[123I]iodo-alpha-methyltyrosine SPET and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the detection and grading of recurrences in patients pretreated for gliomas at follow-up: a comparative study with stereotactic biopsy. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:144–51

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Thompson TP,
    2. Lunsford LD,
    3. Kondziolka D

    . Distinguishing recurrent tumor and radiation necrosis with positron emission tomography versus stereotactic biopsy. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 1999;73:9–14

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Belohlávek O,
    2. Klener J,
    3. Vymazal J,
    4. et al

    . The diagnostics of recurrent gliomas using FDG-PET: still questionable? Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2002;5:127–30

    PubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Pöpperl G,
    2. Gotz C,
    3. Rachinger W,
    4. et al

    . Value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)- L-tyrosine PET for the diagnosis of recurrent glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:1464–70

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Van Laere K,
    2. Ceyssens S,
    3. Van CF,
    4. et al

    . Direct comparison of 18F-FDG and 11C-methionine PET in suspected recurrence of glioma: sensitivity, inter-observer variability and prognostic value. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32:39–51

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Rachinger W,
    2. Goetz C,
    3. Popperl G,
    4. et al

    . Positron emission tomography with O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine versus magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of recurrent gliomas. Neurosurgery 2005;57:505–11

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Gómez-Río M,
    2. Rodriguez-Fernandez A,
    3. Ramos-Font C,
    4. et al

    . Diagnostic accuracy of 201 thallium-SPECT and 18F-FDG-PET in the clinical assessment of glioma recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:966–75

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Mehrkens JH,
    2. Popperl G,
    3. Rachinger W,
    4. et al

    . The positive predictive value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) PET in the diagnosis of a glioma recurrence after multimodal treatment. J Neurooncol 2008;88:27–35

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Terakawa Y,
    2. Tsuyuguchi N,
    3. Iwai Y,
    4. et al

    . Diagnostic accuracy of 11C-methionine PET for differentiation of recurrent brain tumors from radiation necrosis after radiotherapy. J Nucl Med 2008;49:694–99

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Nakajima T,
    2. Kumabe T,
    3. Kanamori M,
    4. et al

    . Differential diagnosis between radiation necrosis and glioma progression using sequential proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy and methionine positron emission tomography. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2009;49:394–401

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Jeong SY,
    2. Lee TH,
    3. Rhee CH,
    4. et al

    . 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine and O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET in patients with suspicious recurrence of glioma after multimodal treatment: initial results of a retrospective comparative study. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;44:45–54

    CrossRef
32. 32.↵
    1. Ozsunar Y,
    2. Mullins ME,
    3. Kwong K,
    4. et al

    . Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis? A pilot comparison of arterial spin-labeled, dynamic susceptibility contrast enhanced MRI, and FDG-PET imaging. Acad Radiol 2010;17:282–90

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Prat R,
    2. Galeano I,
    3. Lucas A,
    4. et al

    . Relative value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy, magnetic resonance perfusion, and 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography for detection of recurrence or grade increase in gliomas. J Clin Neurosci 2010;17:50–53

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Valk PE,
    2. Budinger TF,
    3. Levin VA,
    4. et al

    . PET of malignant cerebral tumors after interstitial brachytherapy: demonstration of metabolic activity and correlation with clinical outcome. J Neurosurg1988;69:830–38

    PubMedWeb of Science
35. 35.↵
    1. Van Tassel P,
    2. Bruner JM,
    3. Maor MH,
    4. et al

    . MR of toxic effects of accelerated fractionation radiation therapy and carboplatin chemotherapy for malignant gliomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1995;16:715–26

    Abstract
36. 36.↵
    1. Tsuyuguchi N,
    2. Takami T,
    3. Sunada I,
    4. et al

    . Methionine positron emission tomography for differentiation of recurrent brain tumor and radiation necrosis after stereotactic radiosurgery–in malignant glioma. Ann Nucl Med 2004;18:291–96

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    1. Miyashita M,
    2. Miyatake S,
    3. Imahori Y,
    4. et al

    . Evaluation of fluoride-labeled boronophenylalanine-PET imaging for the study of radiation effects in patients with glioblastomas. J Neurooncol 2008;89:239–46

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Dandois V,
    2. Rommel D,
    3. Renard L,
    4. et al

    . Substitution of 11C-methionine PET by perfusion MRI during the follow-up of treated high-grade gliomas: preliminary results in clinical practice. J Neuroradiol 2010;37:89–97

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Kim YH,
    2. Oh SW,
    3. Lim YJ,
    4. et al

    . Differentiating radiation necrosis from tumor recurrence in high-grade gliomas: assessing the efficacy of 18F-FDG PET, 11C-methionine PET and perfusion MRI. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2010;112:758–65

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Spence AM,
    2. Muzi M,
    3. Link JM,
    4. et al

    . NCI-sponsored trial for the evaluation of safety and preliminary efficacy of 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine (FLT) as a marker of proliferation in patients with recurrent gliomas: preliminary efficacy studies. Mol Imaging Biol 2009;11:343–55

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Santra A,
    2. Kumar R,
    3. Sharma P,
    4. et al

    . F-18 FDG PET-CT in patients with recurrent glioma: comparison with contrast enhanced MRI. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:508–13

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Vander Borght T,
    2. Asenbaum S,
    3. Bartenstein P,
    4. et al

    . EANM procedure guidelines for brain tumour imaging using labelled amino acid analogues. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:1374–80

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Varrone A,
    2. Asenbaum S,
    3. Vander BT,
    4. et al

    . EANM procedure guidelines for PET brain imaging using [18F]FDG, version 2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:2103–10

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Alexiou GA,
    2. Tsiouris S,
    3. Kyritsis AP,
    4. et al

    . Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis: accuracy of current imaging modalities. J Neurooncol 2009;95:1–11

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Gatsonis C

    . The promise and realities of comparative effectiveness research. Stat Med 2010;29:1977–81, discussion 1996–97

    CrossRefPubMed