Diagnostic performance of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET vs. [18F]FDG PET in detecting lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancers: a head-to-head comparative meta-analysis
Huo Li1, Zhognzhuan Li1, Jing Qin2
1Gastroenterology, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University/Liuzhou Worker's Hospital, Liuzhou, China.
Purpose:
This meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic effectiveness of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET and [18F]FDG PET for detecting lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancer patients.
Methods:
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases was conducted to identify relevant articles up to June 2024. Studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic performance of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET and [18F]FDG PET in detecting lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancer patients. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method and were transformed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation.
Results:
Fifteen articles, encompassing a total of 617 patients, were included in this study. The overall sensitivity of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET for diagnosing lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancers was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.67-0.93), and the specificity was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84-0.97). In comparison, the sensitivity of [18F]FDG PET was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.38-0.63), with a specificity of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.64-0.94). These results suggest that [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET has a significantly higher sensitivity (P < 0.01) and similar specificity (P = 0.20) compared to [18F]FDG PET in detecting lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancers.
Conclusion:
Our meta-analysis indicates that [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET has higher sensitivity and similar specificity compared to [18F]FDG PET in diagnosing lymph node metastasis in digestive system cancers. However, the high heterogeneity among the studies may impact the robustness of the current evidence. Therefore, future research should prioritize larger prospective studies with more diverse populations and specific cancer subtypes to draw more definitive conclusions.
Systematic Review Registration:
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024572412, Unique Identifier: CRD42024572412.
More Related Videos
06:16Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
04:57Comparative Analysis of Automatic Fecal Analyzer versus Direct Wet Smear Microscopy for Detecting Parasitic Infections in Stool Samples
Published on: April 25, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
Pulmonary Tuberculosis IV
Several diagnostic approaches are used to detect TB. The conventional method is the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST), also known as the Mantoux test. However, this method has...
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis I
There are thirteen domains...
