SynthesisAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2014
A meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG and (11)C-methionine PET for differentiating brain tumors.
Synthesis in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic Value of PET Tracers in Differentiating Glioma Tumor Recurrence from Treatment-Related Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- State-of-the-art of FAPI-PET imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance and Prognostic Value of PET/CT with Different Tracers for Brain Tumors: A Systematic Review of Published Meta-Analyses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Pooled it
- The Efficacy and Safety of Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation for Spinal Cord Injury Patients: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.Cell transplantation · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Discrimination between primary low-grade and high-grade glioma withThe British journal of radiology · 2018Pooled it
- The diagnostic performance ofBMC medical imaging · 2017Pooled it
- Performance of 18F-FET versus 18F-FDG-PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis.Neuro-oncology · 2016Pooled it
- Comparison of amide proton transfer imaging and methionine PET for differentiating radiation necrosis and tumor recurrence after radiotherapy: A preliminary case series.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Comparative Insights intoMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Dynamic glucose-enhanced MRI of gliomas: A preliminary clinical application.NMR in biomedicine · 2025Article
- LAT1-specific PET radiotracers: Development and clinical experiences of a new class of cancer-specific radiopharmaceuticals.Theranostics · 2025Review
- Preclinical and Clinical Use of Indigenously DevelopedACS pharmacology & translational science · 2023Review
- Druggability of Targets for Diagnostic Radiopharmaceuticals.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2023Review
- Improving the Classification of PCNSL and Brain Metastases by Developing a Machine Learning Model Based onJournal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Superiority of [International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- An overview of radiolabeled amino acid tracers in oncologic imaging.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Updates in IDH-Wildtype Glioblastoma.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
summary(18)F-FDG-PET has been widely used in patients with brain tumors. However, the reported sensitivity and specificity of (18)F-FDG-PET for brain tumor differentiation varied greatly. We performed this meta-analysis to systematically assess the diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG-PET in differentiating brain tumors. The diagnostic performance of (11)C-methionine PET was assessed for comparison. Relevant studies were searched in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (until February 2013). The methodologic quality of eligible studies was evaluated, and a meta-analysis was performed to obtain the combined diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG and (11)C-methionine PET with a bivariate model. Thirty eligible studies, including 5 studies with both (18)F-FDG and (11)C-methionine PET data were enrolled. Pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of (18)F-FDG-PET (n = 24) for differentiating brain tumors were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.63-0.78), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.85), and 0.80. Heterogeneity was found among (18)F-FDG studies. Subsequent subgroup analysis revealed that the disease status was a statistically significant source of the heterogeneity and that the sensitivity in the patients with recurrent brain tumor was markedly higher than those with suspected primary brain tumors. Pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic of (11)C-methionine PET (n = 11) were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85-0.94), 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78-0.92), and 0.94. No significant statistical heterogeneity was found among (11)C-methionine studies. This meta-analysis suggested that (18)F-FDG-PET has limited diagnostic performance in brain tumor differentiation, though its performance may vary according to the status of brain tumor, whereas (11)C-methionine PET has excellent diagnostic accuracy in brain tumor differentiation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.