Skip to main content

Table 2 Pooled absolute differences (cm) (fixed effect unless noted) and limits of agreement for studies and patients comparing the respective tests

From: Agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and comparison with alternative tests: individual patient data meta-analysis

 

N (studies)

N (patients)

Pooled MD (cm) (95 % CI)

I2

LOA (cm)

All studies and patients

 MRI vs pathology

8

243

0.0 (−0.1, 0.2)

0 %

+/−3.8

Studies of MRI vs US

 MRI vs pathology

5

123

0.1 (−0.2, 0.3)

0 %

+/− 2.8

 US vs pathologya

5

123

−0.3 (−0.6, 0.1)

69 %

+/− 2.6

 MRI and US (mean) vs pathology

5

123

−0.1 (−0.3, 0.1)

16 %

+/− 2.3

 MRI vs USa

5

123

0.3 (−0.1, 0.7)

81 %

NA

MRI vs pathology (patients without US)b

3

14

−1.5 (−3.1, 0.1)

NA

+/− 6.0

Studies of MRI vs mammography

 MRI vs pathology

4

78

0.1 (−0.1, 0.3)

0 %

+/− 4.1

 Mammography vs pathology

4

78

0.0 (−0.3, 0.4)

39 %

+/− 5.0

 MRI and mammography (mean) vs pathology

4

78

0.1 (−0.1, 0.4)

21 %

+/− 4.2

 MRI vs mammography

4

78

0.1 (−0.2, 0.4)

0 %

NA

MRI vs pathology (patients without mammography)b

3

25

0.0 (−0.7, 0.7)

NA

+/− 3.5

Studies of MRI vs clinical examination

 MRI vs pathology

3

107

0.0 (−0.2, 0.3)

0 %

+/− 4.2

 Clinical examination vs pathologya

3

107

−0.8 (−1.5, −0.1)*

57 %

+/− 5.1

 MRI and clinical examination (mean) vs pathology

3

107

−0.2 (−0.5, 0.1)

9 %

+/− 4.1

 MRI vs clinical examinationa

3

107

0.9 (0.2, 1.5)*

56 %

NA

MRI vs pathology (patients without clinical examination)b

2

3

NA c

NA c

NA c

  1. CI confidence interval, LOA limits of agreement, MD mean difference, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, NA not applicable, US ultrasound
  2. *p < 0.01
  3. aRandom effects
  4. bPatients without comparator test combined as a single data set. Pooled meta-analysis not undertaken
  5. cNot calculated due to small number of patients