Wu Guiyou, Wang Daofeng, Zhang Wupeng, Jia Zhengfeng, Li Jiantao, Zhang Licheng
Joint Training Base of Jinzhou Medical University, China Postgraduate Training Base of The Fourth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Hospital of Jinzhou, Medical University, China; Senior Department of Orthopedics, The Fourth Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China; National Clinical Research Center for Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation, Beijing, China.
Department of Sports Medicine, Sports Medicine Service, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Eur J Radiol. 2024 Feb;171:111302. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111302. Epub 2024 Jan 11.
The aim of our meta-analysis and systematic review was to contrast the positivity rates of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI PET and [18F]FDG PET in detecting bone and lymph node metastases across diverse cancer types.
We conducted a comprehensive search for eligible articles up until August 2023, utilizing databases including PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies focusing on the positivity rate of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI PET vs. [18F]FDG PET for bone and lymph metastasis were included. Using random-effect model, the positivity rate for [68Ga]Ga-FAPI PET and [18F]FDG PET were generated. In order to gauge the heterogeneity among aggregated studies, we utilized the I statistic. Additionally, we applied the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies (QUADAS-2) methodology to evaluate the caliber of the studies encompassed in our analysis.
A total of 430 publications were initially identified in the search. Eventually, 25 studies, involving 779 patients, met the inclusion criteria. In terms of bone metastasis, the findings indicate no statistically significant difference between the use of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI PET and [18F]FDG PET (P = 0.34). However, concerning lymph node metastasis, the results demonstrate significant difference between the two imaging agents (P = 0.04).
This systematic review suggests that [68Ga]Ga-FAPI PET appears to outperform [18F]FDG PET in detecting lymph node metastases. However, when it comes to bone metastasis, no statistically significant difference was observed. It is crucial to acknowledge that the insights concerning bone metastasis stem from studies with comparatively modest sample sizes. Consequently, there is a pressing demand for further, expansive prospective studies in this field.
我们进行这项荟萃分析和系统评价的目的是对比[68Ga]镓-纤维连接蛋白激活肽正电子发射断层扫描(PET)和[18F]氟代脱氧葡萄糖PET在检测不同癌症类型的骨和淋巴结转移方面的阳性率。
我们全面检索了截至2023年8月的符合条件的文章,使用了包括PubMed、Embase和科学网在内的数据库。纳入了关注[68Ga]镓-纤维连接蛋白激活肽PET与[18F]氟代脱氧葡萄糖PET对骨和淋巴结转移的阳性率的研究。使用随机效应模型得出[68Ga]镓-纤维连接蛋白激活肽PET和[18F]氟代脱氧葡萄糖PET的阳性率。为了衡量汇总研究之间的异质性,我们使用了I统计量。此外,我们应用诊断性能研究质量评估(QUADAS-2)方法来评估我们分析中所纳入研究的质量。
在检索中最初共识别出430篇出版物。最终,25项研究,涉及779名患者,符合纳入标准。在骨转移方面,结果表明使用[68Ga]镓-纤维连接蛋白激活肽PET和[18F]氟代脱氧葡萄糖PET之间无统计学显著差异(P = 0.34)。然而,关于淋巴结转移,结果显示这两种成像剂之间存在显著差异(P = 0.04)。
这项系统评价表明,[68Ga]镓-纤维连接蛋白激活肽PET在检测淋巴结转移方面似乎优于[18F]氟代脱氧葡萄糖PET。然而,在骨转移方面,未观察到统计学显著差异。必须认识到,关于骨转移的见解来自样本量相对较小的研究。因此,该领域迫切需要进一步的、大规模的前瞻性研究。