Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Update on nodal staging in non-small cell lung cancer with integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography: a meta-analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Nowadays, the number of primary studies on fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has been increasing rapidly. Thus, we updated meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance of FDG PET/CT for nodal staging in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) including the most recent studies.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE for English publications using keywords “positron emission tomography”, “lung cancer”, and “lymph node”. All searches were limited to human studies. Inclusion criteria were studies of the initial nodal staging of NSCLC with PET/CT. The reasons for exclusion are as follows: (1) studies with PET, (2) previous therapy before PET/CT, (3) nodal staging not confirmed by histology, and (4) reviews, abstracts, and editorial materials. 786 articles were identified through database searching.

Results

28 studies including 3,255 patients and 11,887 lymph nodes (LN) were eligible for this study. The pooled sensitivity was 0.62 (95 % CI 0.54–0.70), widely ranging from 0.13 to 0.98. The specificity ranged between 0.72 and 0.98 with an overall estimated specificity of 0.92 (0.88–0.95) for node-based data. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio were 0.67 (0.54–0.79), 0.87 (0.82–0.91), 5.20 (3.59–7.54), and 0.37 (0.25–0.55) for patient-based data. Studies from tuberculosis (Tb) endemic countries showed lower sensitivity (0.56 vs 0.68, p = 0.03) for node-based data and lower specificity (0.83 vs 0.89, p < 0.01) for patient-based ones.

Conclusions

PET/CT has a high specificity, but low sensitivity for detecting LN metastasis in patients with NSCLC. Tb might be one of the main reasons for lower sensitivity of PET/CT in several countries. The primary clinicians of lung cancer should be aware of the possibility of hidden metastatic LNs in bilateral FDG uptake of mediastinal and hilar LNs, especially in the Tb endemic countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(1):9–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Health NIo. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program: National Cancer Institue; [cited 2014].

  3. Ettinger DS, Akerley W, Bepler G, Blum MG, Chang A, Cheney RT, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN. 2010;8(7):740–801.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kim YN, Yi CA, Lee KS, Kwon OJ, Lee HY, Kim BT, et al. A proposal for combined MRI and PET/CT interpretation criteria for preoperative nodal staging in non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(7):1537–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Prenzel KL, Monig SP, Sinning JM, Baldus SE, Brochhagen HG, Schneider PM, et al. Lymph node size and metastatic infiltration in non-small cell lung cancer. Chest. 2003;123(2):463–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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(2):530–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cerfolio RJ, Ojha B, Bryant AS, Raghuveer V, Mountz JM, Bartolucci AA. The accuracy of integrated PET-CT compared with dedicated PET alone for the staging of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac surg. 2004;78(3):1017–23 (discussion 1027-23).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI, Gulenchyn KY, Driedger AA, Ung YC, et al. Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):221–8 W-48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lv YL, Yuan DM, Wang K, Miao XH, Qian Q, Wei SZ, et al. Diagnostic performance of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography for mediastinal lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a bivariate systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol Off Publ Int Assoc Study Lung Cancer. 2011;6(8):1350–8.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Liao CY, Chen JH, Liang JA, Yeh JJ, Kao CH. Meta-analysis study of lymph node staging by 18 F-FDG PET/CT scan in non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of TB and non-TB endemic regions. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(11):3518–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu LM, Xu JR, Gu HY, Hua J, Chen J, Zhang W, et al. Preoperative mediastinal and hilar nodal staging with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: which is better? J Surg Res. 2012;178(1):304–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med. 2001;20(19):2865–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(10):982–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kraemer HC. Evaluating medical tests: objective and quantitative guidelines. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(9):882–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. An YS, Sun JS, Park KJ, Hwang SC, Park KJ, Sheen SS, et al. Diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for lymph node staging in patients with operable non-small-cell lung cancer and inflammatory lung disease. Lung. 2008;186(5):327–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bille A, Pelosi E, Skanjeti A, Arena V, Errico L, Borasio P, et al. Preoperative intrathoracic lymph node staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Eur Journal Cardio-thorac Surg Off J Eur Assoc Cardio-thorac Surg. 2009;36(3):440–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Booth K, Hanna GG, McGonigle N, McManus KG, McGuigan J, O’Sullivan J, et al. The mediastinal staging accuracy of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglycose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in non-small cell lung cancer with variable time intervals to surgery. Ulst Med J. 2013;82(2):75–81.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ceylan N, Dogan S, Kocacelebi K, Savas R, Cakan A, Cagrici U. Contrast enhanced CT versus integrated PET-CT in pre-operative nodal staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2012;18(5):435–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Darling GE, Maziak DE, Inculet RI, Gulenchyn KY, Driedger AA, Ung YC, et al. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography compared with invasive mediastinal staging in non-small cell lung cancer: results of mediastinal staging in the early lung positron emission tomography trial. J Thorac Oncol Off Publ Int Assoc Study Lung Cancer. 2011;6(8):1367–72.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fischer BM, Mortensen J, Hansen H, Vilmann P, Larsen SS, Loft A, et al. Multimodality approach to mediastinal staging in non-small cell lung cancer. Faults and benefits of PET-CT: a randomised trial. Thorax. 2011;66(4):294–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hwangbo B, Kim SK, Lee HS, Lee HS, Kim MS, Lee JM, et al. Application of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration following integrated PET/CT in mediastinal staging of potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer. Chest. 2009;135(5):1280–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim DW, Kim WH, Kim CG. Dual-time-point FDG PET/CT: is it useful for lymph node staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer? Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;46(3):196–200.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim YK, Lee KS, Kim BT, Choi JY, Kim H, Kwon OJ, et al. Mediastinal nodal staging of nonsmall cell lung cancer using integrated 18F-FDG PET/CT in a tuberculosis-endemic country: diagnostic efficacy in 674 patients. Cancer. 2007;109(6):1068–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kuo WH, Wu YC, Wu CY, Ho KC, Chiu PH, Wang CW, et al. Node/aorta and node/liver SUV ratios from (18)F-FDG PET/CT may improve the detection of occult mediastinal lymph node metastases in patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma. Acad Radiol. 2012;19(6):685–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee AY, Choi SJ, Jung KP, Park JS, Lee SM, Bae SK. Characteristics of metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes of non-small cell lung cancer on preoperative F-18 FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;48(1):41–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee BE, von Haag D, Lown T, Lau D, Calhoun R, Follette D. Advances in positron emission tomography technology have increased the need for surgical staging in non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;133(3):746–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee HJ, Kim YT, Kang WJ, Lee HJ, Kang CH, Kim JH. Integrated positron-emission tomography for nodal staging in lung cancer. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2009;17(6):622–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee SM, Park CM, Paeng JC, Im HJ, Goo JM, Lee HJ, et al. Accuracy and predictive features of FDG-PET/CT and CT for diagnosis of lymph node metastasis of T1 non-small-cell lung cancer manifesting as a subsolid nodule. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(7):1556–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Li X, Zhang H, Xing L, Ma H, Xie P, Zhang L, et al. Mediastinal lymph nodes staging by 18F-FDG PET/CT for early stage non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study. Radiother Oncol J Eur Soc Ther Radiol Oncol. 2012;102(2):246–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lin WY, Hsu WH, Lin KH, Wang SJ. Role of preoperative PET-CT in assessing mediastinal and hilar lymph node status in early stage lung cancer. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2012;75(5):203–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Liu BJ, Dong JC, Xu CQ, Zuo CT, Le JJ, Guan YH, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for lymph node staging in non-small-cell lung cancers. Chin Med J. 2009;122(15):1749–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mona A, El-Hariri GKG, Ali M. Refat. Integrated PET/CT in the preoperative staging of lung cancer: a prospective comparison of CT, PET and integrated PET/CT. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2012;43(4):613–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nomori H, Mori T, Ikeda K, Kawanaka K, Shiraishi S, Katahira K, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging can be used in place of positron emission tomography for N staging of non-small cell lung cancer with fewer false-positive results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135(4):816–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ohno Y, Koyama H, Yoshikawa T, Nishio M, Aoyama N, Onishi Y, et al. N stage disease in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: efficacy of quantitative and qualitative assessment with STIR turbo spin-echo imaging, diffusion-weighted MR imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT. Radiology. 2011;261(2):605–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ose N, Sawabata N, Minami M, Inoue M, Shintani Y, Kadota Y, et al. Lymph node metastasis diagnosis using positron emission tomography with 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose as a tracer and computed tomography in surgical cases of non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardio-thorac Surg Off J Eur Assoc Cardio-thorac Surg. 2012;42(1):89–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Plathow C, Aschoff P, Lichy MP, Eschmann S, Hehr T, Brink I, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in staging of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer—initial results. Invest Radiol. 2008;43(5):290–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tasci E, Tezel C, Orki A, Akin O, Falay O, Kutlu CA. The role of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the assessment of nodal spread in cases with non-small cell lung cancer. Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg. 2010;10(2):200–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Toba H, Kondo K, Otsuka H, Takizawa H, Kenzaki K, Sakiyama S, et al. Diagnosis of the presence of lymph node metastasis and decision of operative indication using fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and computed tomography in patients with primary lung cancer. J Med Invest JMI. 2010;57(3–4):305–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Tournoy KG, Maddens S, Gosselin R, Van Maele G, van Meerbeeck JP, Kelles A. Integrated FDG-PET/CT does not make invasive staging of the intrathoracic lymph nodes in non-small cell lung cancer redundant: a prospective study. Thorax. 2007;62(8):696–701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ventura E, Islam T, Gee MS, Mahmood U, Braschi M, Harisinghani MG. Detection of nodal metastatic disease in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography (PET), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), and combined PET-CT. Clin Imaging. 2010;34(1):20–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Xu N, Wang M, Zhu Z, Zhang Y, Jiao Y, Fang W. Integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography in preoperative lymph node staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Chin Med J. 2014;127(4):607–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. World Health Organization WHO. TB data: World health organization. http://www.who.int/tb/country/data/download/en/. Accessed 1 Jan 2015.

  46. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(6):932–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Glas AS, Lijmer JG, Prins MH, Bonsel GJ, Bossuyt PM. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(11):1129–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ha S, Choi H, Cheon GJ, Kang KW, Chung JK, Kim EE, Lee DS. Autoclustering of Non-small Cell Lung Carcinoma Subtypes on 18F-FDG PET Using Texture Analysis: a Preliminary Result. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;48(4):278–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Surti S. Update on Time-of-Flight PET Imaging. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(1):98–105.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Maclean CC, Demas AN, Shigemitsu H, et al. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(11):879–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Birim O, Kappetein AP, Stijnen T, Bogers AJ. Meta-analysis of positron emission tomographic and computed tomographic imaging in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;79(1):375–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Alongi F, Ragusa P, Montemaggi P, Bona CM. Combining independent studies of diagnostic fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography in mediastinal lymph node staging for non-small cell lung cancer. Tumori. 2006;92(4):327–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Lv YL, Yuan DM, Wang K, Miao XH, Qian Q, Wei SZ, et al. Diagnostic performance of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography for mediastinal lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a bivariate systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6(8):1350–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Liao CY, Chen JH, Liang JA, Yeh JJ, Kao CH. Meta-analysis study of lymph node staging by 18 F-FDG PET/CT scan in non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of TB and non-TB endemic regions. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(11):3518–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Wang J, Welch K, Wang L, Kong FMS. Negative predictive value of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for stage T1-2N0 nonsmall-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Lung Cancer. 2012;13(2):81–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Wu LM, Xu JR, Gu HY, Hua J, Chen J, Zhang W, et al. Preoperative mediastinal and hilar nodal staging with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: which is better? J Surg Res. 2012;178(1):304–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Alongi F, Ragusa P, Montemaggi P, Bona CM. Combining independent studies of diagnostic fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography in mediastinal lymph node staging for non-small cell lung cancer. Tumori. 2006;92(4):327–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Wang J, Welch K, Wang L, Kong FM. Negative predictive value of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for stage T1-2N0 non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Lung Cancer. 2012;13(2):81–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the National Research Fund (Grant No. HI13C-1299-020013) of Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI) and Ministry of Health & Welfare of Korea.

Conflict of interest

Nothing to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-gu, Busan, 602-739, Korea

    Kyoungjune Pak & In-Joo Kim

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea

    Sohyun Park, Gi Jeong Cheon, Keon Wook Kang, Dong Soo Lee & June-Key Chung

  3. Department of Molecular Medicine and Biopharmaceutical Science, WCU Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Korea

    Dong Soo Lee & E. Edmund Kim

  4. Department of Radiological Science, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA

    E. Edmund Kim

Authors
  1. Kyoungjune Pak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sohyun Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gi Jeong Cheon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Keon Wook Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. In-Joo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dong Soo Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. E. Edmund Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. June-Key Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gi Jeong Cheon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pak, K., Park, S., Cheon, G.J. et al. Update on nodal staging in non-small cell lung cancer with integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography: a meta-analysis. Ann Nucl Med 29, 409–419 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-015-0958-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-015-0958-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation