SynthesisMedicine2026
Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT scan in distant metastasis staging of non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate detection of distant metastasis (M stage) is pivotal in treatment planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) combines metabolic and anatomic information and may outperform conventional imaging for baseline M-staging. Hence, this review was done to determine the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for distant metastasis of NSCLC.
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis-Diagnostic Test Accuracy, we included studies of adults with NSCLC that reported per-patient diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for any distant metastasis against histology and/or composite reference standard. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Summary sensitivity and specificity were pooled using a bivariate random-effects model with summary receiver operator characteristics curve and likelihood ratios (LRs); heterogeneity, threshold effects, and small-study bias (Deeks test) were assessed.
resultsFifteen studies (298 reference-positive, 1915 reference-negative; pretest probability 13%) were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.91 (95% confidence interval: 0.70-0.98) and 0.98 (0.96-0.99), area under the receiver operating characteristic 0.99 (0.97-0.99). LR+ and LR- were 39.0 (21.5-70.8) and 0.09 (0.02-0.35), respectively; heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 87%). Deeks test showed no asymmetry (P = .48). With contrast-enhanced computed tomography (8 studies), sensitivity and specificity were 0.99 (0.86-1.00) and 0.98 (0.95-0.99), area under the receiver operating characteristic 1.00, with negligible heterogeneity.
conclusion18F-FDG PET/CT provides substantial discrimination for distant metastasis in NSCLC, strongly informing treatment intent. Incorporating diagnostic contrast-enhanced computed tomography within PET/CT materially improves and stabilizes sensitivity; non-contrast protocols retain rule-in value but are less reliable to rule out metastasis.
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.