ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2016
Comparison of meta-analyses among elastosonography (ES) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging techniques in the application of prostate cancer diagnosis.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Mechanisms Related with Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer-Is It Just a Matter of Numbers?Cancers · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The early diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) appears to be of vital significance for the provision of appropriate treatment programs. Even though several sophisticated imaging techniques such as positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and elastosonography (ES) have already been developed for PCa diagnosis, the diagnostic accuracy of these imaging techniques is still controversial to some extent. Therefore, a comprehensive meta-analysis in this study was performed to compare the accuracy of various diagnostic imaging methods for PCa, including 11C-choline PET/CT, 11C-acetate PET/CT, 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT, 18F-fluoroglucose PET/CT, transrectal real-time elastosonography (TRTE), and shear-wave elastosonography (SWE). The eligible studies were identified through systematical searching for the literature in electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science. On the basis of the fixed-effects model, the pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) were calculated to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of 11C-choline PET/CT, 11C-acetate PET/CT, 18F-fluorocholine (FCH) PET/CT, 18F-fluoroglucose (FDG) PET/CT, TRTE, and SWE. All the statistical analyses were conducted with R language Software. The present meta-analysis incorporating a total of 82 studies demonstrated that the pooled sensitivity of the six imaging techniques were sorted as follows: SWE > 18F-FCH PET/CT > 11C-choline PET/CT > TRTE > 11C-acetate PET/CT > 18F-FDG PET/CT; the pooled specificity were also compared: SWE > 18F-FCH PET/CT > 11C-choline PET/CT > TRTE > 18F-FDG PET/CT > 11C-acetate PET/CT; finally, the pooled diagnostic accuracy of the six imaging techniques based on AUC were ranked as below: SWE > 18F-FCH PET/CT > 11C-choline PET/CT > TRTE > 11C-acetate PET/CT > 18F-FDG PET/CT. SWE and 18F-FCH PET/CT imaging could offer more assistance in the early diagnosis of PCa than any other studied imaging techniques. However, the diagnostic ranking of the six imaging techniques might not be applicable to the clinical phase due to the shortage of stratified analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26415734What 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.