Different Imaging Modalities for the Diagnosis of Axillary Lymph Node Metastases in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastasis (ALNM) of breast cancer patients is important to guide local and systemic treatment. PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of different imaging modalities for ALNM in patients with breast cancer. STUDY TYPE: Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). SUBJECTS: Sixty-one original articles with 8011 participants. FIELD STRENGTH: 1.5 T and 3.0 T. ASSESSMENT: We used the QUADAS-2 and QUADAS-C tools to assess the risk of bias in eligible studies. The identified articles assessed ultrasonography (US), MRI, mammography, ultrasound elastography (UE), PET, CT, PET/CT, scintimammography, and PET/MRI. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We used random-effects conventional meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses for data analyses. We used sensitivity and specificity, relative sensitivity and specificity, superiority index, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) analysis to compare the diagnostic value of different imaging modalities. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies evaluated nine imaging modalities. At patient level, sensitivities of the nine imaging modalities ranged from 0.27 to 0.84 and specificities ranged from 0.84 to 0.95. Patient-based NMA showed that UE had the highest superiority index (5.95) with the highest relative sensitivity of 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-1.29) among all imaging methods when compared to US. At lymph node level, MRI had the highest superiority index (6.91) with highest relative sensitivity of 1.13 (95% CI: 1.01-1.23) and highest relative specificity of 1.11 (95% CI: 0.95-1.23) among all imaging methods when compared to US. SROCs also showed that UE and MRI had the largest area under the curve (AUC) at patient level and lymph node level of 0.92 and 0.94, respectively. DATA CONCLUSION: UE and MRI may be superior to other imaging modalities in the diagnosis of ALNM in breast cancer patients at the patient level and the lymph node level, respectively. Further studies are needed to provide high-quality evidence to validate our findings. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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 | 0.026 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".