4.4 Review

The role of 18F-fluciclovine PET in the management of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

CLINICAL RADIOLOGY
Volume 74, Issue 11, Pages 886-892

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2019.06.022

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AIM: To investigate the diagnostic performance of F-18-fluciclovine positron-emission tomography (PET) or combined PET and computed tomography (PET/CT) for diagnosis of primary cancer, preoperative lymph node (LN) staging, and detection of recurrent disease of prostate cancer (PCa) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched from the earliest available date of indexing through 31 December 2018, for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of F-18-fluciclovine PET or PET/CT for the management of PCa patients. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) across the studies were calculated and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed. RESULTS: Across 13 studies (563 patients), the pooled sensitivity for F-18-fluciclovine PET or PET/CT for diagnosis of primary PCa was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.93) and a pooled specificity of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.68-0.93). For LN staging, the pooled sensitivity was 0.56 (95% CI: 0.37-0.74) and a pooled specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.88-1.00). For detection of recurrent disease, the pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.60-0.91) and a pooled specificity of 0.69 (95% CI: 0.59-0.77). In meta-regression analysis, no definite variable was the source of the study heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: The current meta-analysis showed the moderate sensitivity and specificity of F-18-fluciclovine PET or PET/CT for the diagnosis of primary cancer, preoperative LN staging, and detection of recurrent PCa. Further large multicentre studies will be necessary to substantiate the diagnostic accuracy of F-18-fluciclovine PET/CT for management of PCa patients. (C) 2019 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available