Skip to main content

Advertisement

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