↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

123I-MIBG scintigraphy and 18F-FDG-PET imaging for diagnosing neuroblastoma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
123I-MIBG scintigraphy and 18F-FDG-PET imaging for diagnosing neuroblastoma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009263.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gitta Bleeker, Godelieve AM Tytgat, Judit A Adam, Huib N Caron, Leontien CM Kremer, Lotty Hooft, Elvira C van Dalen

Abstract

Neuroblastoma is an embryonic tumour of childhood that originates in the neural crest. It is the second most common extracranial malignant solid tumour of childhood.Neuroblastoma cells have the unique capacity to accumulate Iodine-123-metaiodobenzylguanidine (¹²³I-MIBG), which can be used for imaging the tumour. Moreover, ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy is not only important for the diagnosis of neuroblastoma, but also for staging and localization of skeletal lesions. If these are present, MIBG follow-up scans are used to assess the patient's response to therapy. However, the sensitivity and specificity of ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy to detect neuroblastoma varies according to the literature.Prognosis, treatment and response to therapy of patients with neuroblastoma are currently based on extension scoring of ¹²³I-MIBG scans. Due to its clinical use and importance, it is necessary to determine the exact diagnostic accuracy of ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy. In case the tumour is not MIBG avid, fluorine-18-fluorodeoxy-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is often used and the diagnostic accuracy of this test should also be assessed. Primary objectives:1.1 To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ¹²³I-MIBG (single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), with or without computed tomography (CT)) scintigraphy for detecting a neuroblastoma and its metastases at first diagnosis or at recurrence in children from 0 to 18 years old.1.2 To determine the diagnostic accuracy of negative ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy in combination with (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging for detecting a neuroblastoma and its metastases at first diagnosis or at recurrence in children from 0 to 18 years old, i.e. an add-on test.Secondary objectives:2.1 To determine the diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging for detecting a neuroblastoma and its metastases at first diagnosis or at recurrence in children from 0 to 18 years old.2.2 To compare the diagnostic accuracy of ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) and (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging for detecting a neuroblastoma and its metastases at first diagnosis or at recurrence in children from 0 to 18 years old. This was performed within and between included studies. ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) scintigraphy was the comparator test in this case. We searched the databases of MEDLINE/PubMed (1945 to 11 September 2012) and EMBASE/Ovid (1980 to 11 September 2012) for potentially relevant articles. Also we checked the reference lists of relevant articles and review articles, scanned conference proceedings and searched for unpublished studies by contacting researchers involved in this area. We included studies of a cross-sectional design or cases series of proven neuroblastoma, either retrospective or prospective, if they compared the results of ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) scintigraphy or (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging, or both, with the reference standards or with each other. Studies had to be primary diagnostic and report on children aged between 0 to 18 years old with a neuroblastoma of any stage at first diagnosis or at recurrence. One review author performed the initial screening of identified references. Two review authors independently performed the study selection, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality.We used data from two-by-two tables, describing at least the number of patients with a true positive test and the number of patients with a false negative test, to calculate the sensitivity, and if possible, the specificity for each included study.If possible, we generated forest plots showing estimates of sensitivity and specificity together with 95% confidence intervals. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Ten studies reported data on patient level: the scan was positive or negative. One study reported on all single lesions (lesion level). The sensitivity of ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) scintigraphy (objective 1.1), determined in 608 of 621 eligible patients included in the 11 studies, varied from 67% to 100%. One study, that reported on a lesion level, provided data to calculate the specificity: 68% in 115 lesions in 22 patients. The sensitivity of ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy for detecting metastases separately from the primary tumour in patients with all neuroblastoma stages ranged from 79% to 100% in three studies and the specificity ranged from 33% to 89% for two of these studies.One study reported on the diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging (add-on test) in patients with negative ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy (objective 1.2). Two of the 24 eligible patients with proven neuroblastoma had a negative ¹²³I-MIBG scan and a positive (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) scan.The sensitivity of (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging as a single diagnostic test (objective 2.1) and compared to ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) (objective 2.2) was only reported in one study. The sensitivity of (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging was 100% versus 92% of ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) scintigraphy. We could not calculate the specificity for both modalities. The reported sensitivities of ¹²³-I MIBG scintigraphy for the detection of neuroblastoma and its metastases ranged from 67 to 100% in patients with histologically proven neuroblastoma.Only one study in this review reported on false positive findings. It is important to keep in mind that false positive findings can occur. For example, physiological uptake should be ruled out, by using SPECT-CT scans, although more research is needed before definitive conclusions can be made.As described both in the literature and in this review, in about 10% of the patients with histologically proven neuroblastoma the tumour does not accumulate ¹²³I-MIBG (false negative results). For these patients, it is advisable to perform an additional test for staging and assess response to therapy. Additional tests might for example be (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT), but to be certain of its clinical value, more evidence is needed.The diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging in case of a negative ¹²³I-MIBG scintigraphy could not be calculated, because only very limited data were available. Also the detection of the diagnostic accuracy of index test (18)F-FDG-PET(-CT) imaging for detecting a neuroblastoma tumour and its metastases, and to compare this to comparator test ¹²³I-MIBG (SPECT-CT) scintigraphy, could not be calculated because of the limited available data at time of this search.At the start of this project, we did not expect to find only very limited data on specificity. We now consider it would have been more appropriate to use the term "the sensitivity to assess the presence of neuroblastoma" instead of "diagnostic accuracy" for the objectives.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 150 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 11 7%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 6%
Psychology 6 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 33 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 December 2019.
All research outputs
#3,913,131
of 16,380,257 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,312
of 11,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,022
of 252,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#188
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,380,257 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 252,345 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.