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