Performance of fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography imaging for lymph node staging in bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the current literature on the accuracy of fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG PET-CT) for lymph node (LN) staging in urothelial carcinoma (UC), as robust evidence on the value of this technology in UC is still lacking.Methods: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE)/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched for eligible studies. We included all original studies evaluating FDG PET-CT in bladder or upper tract UC. The search results were restricted to the English language, and included prospective and retrospective studies without time restriction. We included only studies reporting the sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET-CT in detecting UC LN metastases.Results: We identified 23 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. In the preoperative setting, the sensitivity of FDG PET-CT for detecting LN metastases in patients with bladder cancer was widely variable ranging from 23% to 89%; the specificity ranged from 81% to 100%; and the overall accuracy ranged from 65% to 89%. During bladder cancer monitoring the sensitivity for detecting LN metastases ranged from 75% to 92% and the specificity ranged from 60% to 92%. The sensitivity for LN staging in upper tract UC ranged between 82% and 95%, with a specificity of 84–91%.Conclusion: Despite the inconsistencies in sensitivity between the reports, FDG PET-CT seems to have a high specificity for LN staging in patients with UC. Future prospective, well-designed studies are necessary to evaluate the role of FDG PET-CT in UC management.Abbreviations: FDG: fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose; LN: lymph node; PET: positron emission tomography; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses; PSMA: prostate-specific membrane antigen; (N)(P)PV: (negative) (positive) predictive value; QUADAS-2: Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2; SUVmax: maximum standard uptake value; (UT)UC: (upper urinary tract) urothelial carcinoma
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".