Skip to main content

Table 2 Baseline information of included studies for glioma grading

From: Diagnostic and grading accuracy of 18F-FDOPA PET and PET/CT in patients with gliomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Reference Year Country Design Specimens No. Patients No. Age, yr M/F Test Prior treatment Occurrence Gold Standard Parameter Cut-off
Meana Median
Fueger et al. [12] 2010 US 17 Prospective+ 42 Retrospective 59 59 (22b) 44.5 13/9 PET or PET/CT With (Sx + CT/RT) or without New Histo SUVmax 2.72
Nioche et al. [32] 2013 France Prospective 33 33 51 ± 16 51 28/5 PET/CT With (Sx + CT/RT) or without 20 New+ 13 Recur Histo SUVmean 2.2
Pafundi et al. [24] 2013 US Prospective 23 10 (9b) 42.9 ± 19.2 8/1 PET/CT With or without 7 New+ 2 Recur Histo SUVmax T/SUVmean N 2.0
Janvier et al. [13] 2015 France Retrospective 31 31 36.8 ± 12.1 13/18 PET With (Sx/CT/RT) or without 25 New+ 6 Recur Histo+Radio+follow-up SUVmean T/N 1.33
Bund et al. [33] 2017 France Prospective 53 53 38 23/30 PET/CT Without New Histo SUVmax T/N 2.16
Morana et al. [34] 2017 Italy Retrospective 26 26 10.2 ± 4.6 9.5 15/11 PET Without New Histo SUVmax T/S 0.90
Patel et al. [35] 2018 US Prospective 45 45 46.4 ± 16.2 22/23 PET Without New Histo SUVmax T/N 1.7
  1. M, male; F, female; Sx, surgery; CT, chemotherapy; RT, radiation therapy; New, newly-diagnosed; Recur, recurrent; Histo, histopathology; SUV, standardized uptake value; Radio, radiology; T, tumor; N, normal; S, Striatum
  2. aMean age is expressed as mean ± standard deviation
  3. bPatients that are finally included in the quantitative analysis by authors