IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0146195.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Surgical Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Liu
  • Min Dong
  • Xiaorong Sun
  • Wenwu Li
  • Ligang Xing
  • Jinming Yu

Abstract

Background: The identification of surgical non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with poor prognosis is a priority in clinical oncology because of their high 5-year mortality. This meta-analysis explored the prognostic value of maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in surgical NSCLC patients. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Libraries were systematically searched until August 1, 2015. Prospective or retrospective studies that evaluated the prognostic roles of preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT with complete DFS and OS data in surgical NSCLC patients were included. The impact of SUVmax, MTV or TLG on survival was measured using hazard ratios (HR). Sub-group analyses were performed based on disease stage, pathological classification, surgery only and cut-off values. Results: Thirty-six studies comprised of 5807 patients were included. The combined HRs for DFS were 2.74 (95%CI 2.33–3.24, unadjusted) and 2.43 (95%CI: 1.76–3.36, adjusted) for SUVmax, 2.27 (95%CI 1.77–2.90, unadjusted) and 2.49 (95%CI 1.23–5.04, adjusted) for MTV, and 2.46 (95%CI 1.91–3.17, unadjusted) and 2.97 (95%CI 1.68–5.28, adjusted) for TLG. The pooled HRs for OS were 2.54 (95%CI 1.86–3.49, unadjusted) and 1.52 (95%CI 1.16–2.00, adjusted) for SUVmax, 2.07 (95%CI 1.16–3.69, unadjusted) and 1.91 (95%CI 1.13–3.22, adjusted) for MTV, and 2.47 (95%CI 1.38–4.43, unadjusted) and 1.94 (95%CI 1.12–3.33, adjusted) for TLG. Begg’s test detected publication bias, the trim and fill procedure was performed, and similar HRs were obtained. The prognostic role of SUVmax, MTV and TLG remained similar in the sub-group analyses. Conclusions: High values of SUVmax, MTV and TLG predicted a higher risk of recurrence or death in patients with surgical NSCLC. We suggest the use of FDG PET/CT to select patients who are at high risk of disease recurrence or death and may benefit from aggressive treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Liu & Min Dong & Xiaorong Sun & Wenwu Li & Ligang Xing & Jinming Yu, 2016. "Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Surgical Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0146195
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0146195
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0146195&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0146195?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0146195. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.