The Role of FDG-PET in the Initial Staging and Response Assessment of Anal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Annals of Surgical Oncology, ISSN: 1534-4681, Vol: 22, Issue: 11, Page: 3574-3581
2015
- 104Citations
- 52Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations104
- Citation Indexes97
- 97
- CrossRef34
- Policy Citations5
- Policy Citation5
- Clinical Citations2
- PubMed Guidelines2
- Captures52
- Readers52
- 52
Article Description
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the role of FDG-positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/computed tomography (CT) with conventional imaging in the detection of primary and nodal disease in anal cancer, and to assess the impact of PET or PET/CT on the management of anal cancer. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed. Eligible studies included those comparing PET or PET/CT with conventional imaging in the staging of histologically confirmed anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), or studies that performed PET or PET/CT imaging to assess response following treatment. Results: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. For the detection of primary disease, CT and PET had a sensitivity of 60 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 45.5–75.2) and 99 % (95 % CI 96–100), respectively. Compared with conventional imaging, PET upstaged 15 % (95 % CI 10–21) and downstaged 15 % (95 % CI 10–20) of nodal disease. This led to a change in nodal staging in 28 % of patients (95 % CI 18–38). When only studies performing contemporary PET/CT were considered, the rate of nodal upstaging was 21 % (95 % CI 13–30) and the TNM stage was altered in 41 % of patients. Following chemoradiotherapy, 78 % (95 % CI 65–88) of patients had a complete response on PET. Conclusion: Compared with conventional imaging, PET or PET/CT alters the nodal status in a sufficient number of cases to justify its routine use in the staging of patients with anal SCC.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84941423537&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4391-9; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25652048; http://link.springer.com/10.1245/s10434-015-4391-9; https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4391-9; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1245%2Fs10434-015-4391-9
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know