Ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for staging and re-staging of adults with cutaneous melanoma.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 07 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 2 7 2019
medline: 29 9 2019
entrez: 2 7 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Melanoma is one of the most aggressive forms of skin cancer, with the potential to metastasise to other parts of the body via the lymphatic system and the bloodstream. Melanoma accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. Various imaging tests can be used with the aim of detecting metastatic spread of disease following a primary diagnosis of melanoma (primary staging) or on clinical suspicion of disease recurrence (re-staging). Accurate staging is crucial to ensuring that patients are directed to the most appropriate and effective treatment at different points on the clinical pathway. Establishing the comparative accuracy of ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET)-CT imaging for detection of nodal or distant metastases, or both, is critical to understanding if, how, and where on the pathway these tests might be used. Primary objectivesWe estimated accuracy separately according to the point in the clinical pathway at which imaging tests were used. Our objectives were:• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound or PET-CT for detection of nodal metastases before sentinel lymph node biopsy in adults with confirmed cutaneous invasive melanoma; and• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for whole body imaging in adults with cutaneous invasive melanoma:○ for detection of any metastasis in adults with a primary diagnosis of melanoma (i.e. primary staging at presentation); and○ for detection of any metastasis in adults undergoing staging of recurrence of melanoma (i.e. re-staging prompted by findings on routine follow-up).We undertook separate analyses according to whether accuracy data were reported per patient or per lesion.Secondary objectivesWe sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for whole body imaging (detection of any metastasis) in mixed or not clearly described populations of adults with cutaneous invasive melanoma.For study participants undergoing primary staging or re-staging (for possible recurrence), and for mixed or unclear populations, our objectives were:• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of nodal metastases;• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of distant metastases; and• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of distant metastases according to metastatic site. We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles. We included studies of any design that evaluated ultrasound (with or without the use of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC)), CT, MRI, or PET-CT for staging of cutaneous melanoma in adults, compared with a reference standard of histological confirmation or imaging with clinical follow-up of at least three months' duration. We excluded studies reporting multiple applications of the same test in more than 10% of study participants. Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2)). We estimated accuracy using the bivariate hierarchical method to produce summary sensitivities and specificities with 95% confidence and prediction regions. We undertook analysis of studies allowing direct and indirect comparison between tests. We examined heterogeneity between studies by visually inspecting the forest plots of sensitivity and specificity and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plots. Numbers of identified studies were insufficient to allow formal investigation of potential sources of heterogeneity. We included a total of 39 publications reporting on 5204 study participants; 34 studies reporting data per patient included 4980 study participants with 1265 cases of metastatic disease, and seven studies reporting data per lesion included 417 study participants with 1846 potentially metastatic lesions, 1061 of which were confirmed metastases. The risk of bias was low or unclear for all domains apart from participant flow. Concerns regarding applicability of the evidence were high or unclear for almost all domains. Participant selection from mixed or not clearly defined populations and poorly described application and interpretation of index tests were particularly problematic.The accuracy of imaging for detection of regional nodal metastases before sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) was evaluated in 18 studies. In 11 studies (2614 participants; 542 cases), the summary sensitivity of ultrasound alone was 35.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 17.0% to 59.4%) and specificity was 93.9% (95% CI 86.1% to 97.5%). Combining pre-SLNB ultrasound with FNAC revealed summary sensitivity of 18.0% (95% CI 3.58% to 56.5%) and specificity of 99.8% (95% CI 99.1% to 99.9%) (1164 participants; 259 cases). Four studies demonstrated lower sensitivity (10.2%, 95% CI 4.31% to 22.3%) and specificity (96.5%,95% CI 87.1% to 99.1%) for PET-CT before SLNB (170 participants, 49 cases). When these data are translated to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 people eligible for SLNB, 237 of whom have nodal metastases (median prevalence), the combination of ultrasound with FNAC potentially allows 43 people with nodal metastases to be triaged directly to adjuvant therapy rather than having SLNB first, at a cost of two people with false positive results (who are incorrectly managed). Those with a false negative ultrasound will be identified on subsequent SLNB.Limited test accuracy data were available for whole body imaging via PET-CT for primary staging or re-staging for disease recurrence, and none evaluated MRI. Twenty-four studies evaluated whole body imaging. Six of these studies explored primary staging following a confirmed diagnosis of melanoma (492 participants), three evaluated re-staging of disease following some clinical indication of recurrence (589 participants), and 15 included mixed or not clearly described population groups comprising participants at a number of different points on the clinical pathway and at varying stages of disease (1265 participants). Results for whole body imaging could not be translated to a hypothetical cohort of people due to paucity of data.Most of the studies (6/9) of primary disease or re-staging of disease considered PET-CT, two in comparison to CT alone, and three studies examined the use of ultrasound. No eligible evaluations of MRI in these groups were identified. All studies used histological reference standards combined with follow-up, and two included FNAC for some participants. Observed accuracy for detection of any metastases for PET-CT was higher for re-staging of disease (summary sensitivity from two studies: 92.6%, 95% CI 85.3% to 96.4%; specificity: 89.7%, 95% CI 78.8% to 95.3%; 153 participants; 95 cases) compared to primary staging (sensitivities from individual studies ranged from 30% to 47% and specificities from 73% to 88%), and was more sensitive than CT alone in both population groups, but participant numbers were very small.No conclusions can be drawn regarding routine imaging of the brain via MRI or CT. Review authors found a disappointing lack of evidence on the accuracy of imaging in people with a diagnosis of melanoma at different points on the clinical pathway. Studies were small and often reported data according to the number of lesions rather than the number of study participants. Imaging with ultrasound combined with FNAC before SLNB may identify around one-fifth of those with nodal disease, but confidence intervals are wide and further work is needed to establish cost-effectiveness. Much of the evidence for whole body imaging for primary staging or re-staging of disease is focused on PET-CT, and comparative data with CT or MRI are lacking. Future studies should go beyond diagnostic accuracy and consider the effects of different imaging tests on disease management. The increasing availability of adjuvant therapies for people with melanoma at high risk of disease spread at presentation will have a considerable impact on imaging services, yet evidence for the relative diagnostic accuracy of available tests is limited.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Melanoma is one of the most aggressive forms of skin cancer, with the potential to metastasise to other parts of the body via the lymphatic system and the bloodstream. Melanoma accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. Various imaging tests can be used with the aim of detecting metastatic spread of disease following a primary diagnosis of melanoma (primary staging) or on clinical suspicion of disease recurrence (re-staging). Accurate staging is crucial to ensuring that patients are directed to the most appropriate and effective treatment at different points on the clinical pathway. Establishing the comparative accuracy of ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET)-CT imaging for detection of nodal or distant metastases, or both, is critical to understanding if, how, and where on the pathway these tests might be used.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objectivesWe estimated accuracy separately according to the point in the clinical pathway at which imaging tests were used. Our objectives were:• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound or PET-CT for detection of nodal metastases before sentinel lymph node biopsy in adults with confirmed cutaneous invasive melanoma; and• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for whole body imaging in adults with cutaneous invasive melanoma:○ for detection of any metastasis in adults with a primary diagnosis of melanoma (i.e. primary staging at presentation); and○ for detection of any metastasis in adults undergoing staging of recurrence of melanoma (i.e. re-staging prompted by findings on routine follow-up).We undertook separate analyses according to whether accuracy data were reported per patient or per lesion.Secondary objectivesWe sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for whole body imaging (detection of any metastasis) in mixed or not clearly described populations of adults with cutaneous invasive melanoma.For study participants undergoing primary staging or re-staging (for possible recurrence), and for mixed or unclear populations, our objectives were:• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of nodal metastases;• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of distant metastases; and• to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for detection of distant metastases according to metastatic site.
SEARCH METHODS
We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists as well as published systematic review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies of any design that evaluated ultrasound (with or without the use of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC)), CT, MRI, or PET-CT for staging of cutaneous melanoma in adults, compared with a reference standard of histological confirmation or imaging with clinical follow-up of at least three months' duration. We excluded studies reporting multiple applications of the same test in more than 10% of study participants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2)). We estimated accuracy using the bivariate hierarchical method to produce summary sensitivities and specificities with 95% confidence and prediction regions. We undertook analysis of studies allowing direct and indirect comparison between tests. We examined heterogeneity between studies by visually inspecting the forest plots of sensitivity and specificity and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plots. Numbers of identified studies were insufficient to allow formal investigation of potential sources of heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 39 publications reporting on 5204 study participants; 34 studies reporting data per patient included 4980 study participants with 1265 cases of metastatic disease, and seven studies reporting data per lesion included 417 study participants with 1846 potentially metastatic lesions, 1061 of which were confirmed metastases. The risk of bias was low or unclear for all domains apart from participant flow. Concerns regarding applicability of the evidence were high or unclear for almost all domains. Participant selection from mixed or not clearly defined populations and poorly described application and interpretation of index tests were particularly problematic.The accuracy of imaging for detection of regional nodal metastases before sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) was evaluated in 18 studies. In 11 studies (2614 participants; 542 cases), the summary sensitivity of ultrasound alone was 35.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 17.0% to 59.4%) and specificity was 93.9% (95% CI 86.1% to 97.5%). Combining pre-SLNB ultrasound with FNAC revealed summary sensitivity of 18.0% (95% CI 3.58% to 56.5%) and specificity of 99.8% (95% CI 99.1% to 99.9%) (1164 participants; 259 cases). Four studies demonstrated lower sensitivity (10.2%, 95% CI 4.31% to 22.3%) and specificity (96.5%,95% CI 87.1% to 99.1%) for PET-CT before SLNB (170 participants, 49 cases). When these data are translated to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 people eligible for SLNB, 237 of whom have nodal metastases (median prevalence), the combination of ultrasound with FNAC potentially allows 43 people with nodal metastases to be triaged directly to adjuvant therapy rather than having SLNB first, at a cost of two people with false positive results (who are incorrectly managed). Those with a false negative ultrasound will be identified on subsequent SLNB.Limited test accuracy data were available for whole body imaging via PET-CT for primary staging or re-staging for disease recurrence, and none evaluated MRI. Twenty-four studies evaluated whole body imaging. Six of these studies explored primary staging following a confirmed diagnosis of melanoma (492 participants), three evaluated re-staging of disease following some clinical indication of recurrence (589 participants), and 15 included mixed or not clearly described population groups comprising participants at a number of different points on the clinical pathway and at varying stages of disease (1265 participants). Results for whole body imaging could not be translated to a hypothetical cohort of people due to paucity of data.Most of the studies (6/9) of primary disease or re-staging of disease considered PET-CT, two in comparison to CT alone, and three studies examined the use of ultrasound. No eligible evaluations of MRI in these groups were identified. All studies used histological reference standards combined with follow-up, and two included FNAC for some participants. Observed accuracy for detection of any metastases for PET-CT was higher for re-staging of disease (summary sensitivity from two studies: 92.6%, 95% CI 85.3% to 96.4%; specificity: 89.7%, 95% CI 78.8% to 95.3%; 153 participants; 95 cases) compared to primary staging (sensitivities from individual studies ranged from 30% to 47% and specificities from 73% to 88%), and was more sensitive than CT alone in both population groups, but participant numbers were very small.No conclusions can be drawn regarding routine imaging of the brain via MRI or CT.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Review authors found a disappointing lack of evidence on the accuracy of imaging in people with a diagnosis of melanoma at different points on the clinical pathway. Studies were small and often reported data according to the number of lesions rather than the number of study participants. Imaging with ultrasound combined with FNAC before SLNB may identify around one-fifth of those with nodal disease, but confidence intervals are wide and further work is needed to establish cost-effectiveness. Much of the evidence for whole body imaging for primary staging or re-staging of disease is focused on PET-CT, and comparative data with CT or MRI are lacking. Future studies should go beyond diagnostic accuracy and consider the effects of different imaging tests on disease management. The increasing availability of adjuvant therapies for people with melanoma at high risk of disease spread at presentation will have a considerable impact on imaging services, yet evidence for the relative diagnostic accuracy of available tests is limited.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31260100
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012806.pub2
pmc: PMC6601698
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD012806

Subventions

Organisme : Worldwide Cancer Research
ID : 12-0023
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 13/89/15
Pays : United Kingdom

Références

Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Jul;13(7):919-26
pubmed: 16788752
Neuro Oncol. 2017 Oct 19;19(11):1511-1521
pubmed: 28444227
Ann Surg. 2012 Apr;255(4):771-6
pubmed: 22367443
Cancer Treat Rev. 2016 Jan;42:73-81
pubmed: 26563920
Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Apr;22(4):1366-70
pubmed: 25472650
Br J Dermatol. 2006 Sep;155(3):552-6
pubmed: 16911280
J Nucl Med. 2000 Sep;41(9):1491-4
pubmed: 10994727
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Jul;14(7):2133-40
pubmed: 17453294
J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Sep;58(9):882-93
pubmed: 16085191
Cancer. 2009 Feb 15;115(4):869-79
pubmed: 19117354
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009 Apr;62(4):453-6
pubmed: 18468970
J Clin Oncol. 1999 Jul;17(7):2105-16
pubmed: 10561265
Radiology. 1996 Apr;199(1):273-7
pubmed: 8633159
Dermatology. 2011;222(2):180-8
pubmed: 21464558
Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2016 Jan-Feb;107(1):55-61
pubmed: 26548299
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Sep;34(9):1355-64
pubmed: 17295038
Cancer. 2005 Aug 1;104(3):570-9
pubmed: 15977211
Eur J Radiol. 2005 May;54(2):264-70
pubmed: 15837408
J Laryngol Otol. 2016 Jul;130 Suppl 4:S45-9
pubmed: 27488337
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987 Aug;80(2):233-9
pubmed: 3602173
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2014 Sep;28(9):1170-8
pubmed: 23962170
J Surg Oncol. 2014 Jun;109(7):726-9
pubmed: 24375280
Radiology. 1992 Apr;183(1):215-20
pubmed: 1549675
Hell J Nucl Med. 2012 Sep-Dec;15(3):202-5
pubmed: 23106051
Radiology. 2014 Feb;270(2):425-34
pubmed: 24072776
Arch Dermatol. 2002 Apr;138(4):491-7
pubmed: 11939811
Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2007 Oct;98(8):531-8
pubmed: 17919427
Br J Dermatol. 2010 Sep;163(3):550-6
pubmed: 20545694
Ann Surg Oncol. 2005 Jan;12(1):18-23
pubmed: 15827773
Arch Dermatol. 1995 Dec;131(12):1394-8
pubmed: 7492127
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Mar 1;24(7):1178-87
pubmed: 16505438
Am J Surg. 2014 Apr;207(4):549-54
pubmed: 24674829
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009 Jun;36(6):910-8
pubmed: 19156409
Ann Surg Oncol. 2005 Nov;12(11):943-9
pubmed: 16177860
J Nucl Med. 1993 Sep;34(9):1420-7
pubmed: 8355058
Anticancer Res. 1999 Jul-Aug;19(4A):2685-90
pubmed: 10470220
Med Klin (Munich). 2003 Dec 15;98(12):783-7
pubmed: 14685681
Eur J Cancer. 2005 Jan;41(1):28-44
pubmed: 15617989
Ann Surg Oncol. 1997 Apr-May;4(3):252-8
pubmed: 9142387
Rofo. 1985 Oct;143(4):398-407
pubmed: 2997865
Mol Imaging Biol. 2005 Jul-Aug;7(4):304-8
pubmed: 16041590
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Feb 10;28(5):847-52
pubmed: 20065175
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Nov 10;37(32):3000-3008
pubmed: 31557067
Dermatol Surg. 2009 Nov;35(11):1757-65
pubmed: 19660025
J Clin Oncol. 1998 May;16(5):1770-6
pubmed: 9586890
Acta Radiol. 1988 Jul-Aug;29(4):391-4
pubmed: 3408597
Melanoma Res. 2004 Dec;14(6):533-6
pubmed: 15577326
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981 Jan;136(1):145-9
pubmed: 6779562
Melanoma Res. 2007 Aug;17(4):233-7
pubmed: 17625453
Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86
pubmed: 25220842
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11:CD007064
pubmed: 23152241
Acad Radiol. 2014 Jan;21(1):113-25
pubmed: 24331274
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Mar;43(3):482-8
pubmed: 26384681
Acta Chir Belg. 2005 Nov-Dec;105(6):621-5
pubmed: 16438072
J Am Coll Surg. 2011 Aug;213(2):306-16
pubmed: 21493111
Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Nov;13(11):1511-6
pubmed: 17009151
Melanoma Res. 2015 Dec;25(6):519-27
pubmed: 25933210
J Dermatol Sci. 2016 Dec;84(3):330-339
pubmed: 27663092
Front Radiat Ther Oncol. 2006;39:159-170
pubmed: 16394679
Eur J Cancer. 2007 Feb;43(3):557-64
pubmed: 17224266
Insights Imaging. 2013 Oct;4(5):701-9
pubmed: 24018755
Radiology. 1999 Oct;213(1):92-6
pubmed: 10540646
N Engl J Med. 2010 Aug 19;363(8):711-23
pubmed: 20525992
Nuklearmedizin. 2011;50(3):116-21
pubmed: 21246162
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 Feb;37(2):284-300
pubmed: 19727717
Melanoma Res. 2011 Aug;21(4):364-9
pubmed: 21540750
CMAJ. 2013 Aug 6;185(11):E537-44
pubmed: 23798453
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Apr;198(4):902-8
pubmed: 22451559
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2012 Jun;38(6):933-42
pubmed: 22502891
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Feb 1;26(4):527-34
pubmed: 18235113
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005 Jan;19(1):66-73
pubmed: 15649194
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Oct 1;27(28):4774-80
pubmed: 19720925
Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2012 Apr;103(3):207-13
pubmed: 21899829
J Nucl Med. 2008 Mar;49(3):480-508
pubmed: 18287273
Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2006 Sep;25(5):301-11
pubmed: 17173776
JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388-396
pubmed: 29362800
Melanoma Res. 2004 Apr;14(2):141-5
pubmed: 15057045
Dermatol Res Pract. 2012;2012:614349
pubmed: 22654898
Melanoma Res. 2016 Jun;26(3):267-71
pubmed: 26881876
Oncology. 2014;87(6):321-9
pubmed: 25227433
Nucl Med Commun. 2008 Oct;29(10):847-76
pubmed: 18769303
Am J Epidemiol. 1977 May;105(5):420-7
pubmed: 860705
Nucl Med Commun. 2011 Sep;32(9):873
pubmed: 21799372
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 06;2:CD011123
pubmed: 29405038
J Surg Oncol. 2003 Jun;83(2):80-4
pubmed: 12772200
BMC Cancer. 2011 Aug 02;11:328
pubmed: 21810220
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 Sep;145(3):375-82
pubmed: 21540313
J Clin Oncol. 1992 Aug;10(8):1330-7
pubmed: 1634923
Melanoma Res. 2013 Feb;23(1):21-6
pubmed: 23117880
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):529-36
pubmed: 22007046
Ann Surg Oncol. 2008 Oct;15(10):2976-7
pubmed: 18546043
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1983 May-Jun;4(3):484-7
pubmed: 6410778
Otolaryngol Pol. 2013 Jan-Feb;67(1):18-24
pubmed: 23374659
Eur J Nucl Med. 1999 Dec;26(12):1567-71
pubmed: 10638408
Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013 Dec 15;4(1):17-28
pubmed: 24380042
Clin Nucl Med. 2008 Aug;33(8):562-4
pubmed: 18645380
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999 Nov;41(5 Pt 1):703-9
pubmed: 10534631
Ann Surg Oncol. 2002 Oct;9(8):719-22
pubmed: 12374653
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Feb;18(2):506-13
pubmed: 20734149
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1983 Jul;141(1):169-74
pubmed: 6602514
Cancer. 2000 Jun 1;88(11):2534-9
pubmed: 10861430
Melanoma Res. 2007 Jun;17(3):147-54
pubmed: 17505260
J Clin Oncol. 1995 Aug;13(8):2104-8
pubmed: 7636554
Am J Surg. 2013 Dec;206(6):979-85; discussion 985-6
pubmed: 24124660
Cancer. 1998 May 1;82(9):1664-71
pubmed: 9576286
Acta Radiol. 2000 Sep;41(5):446-52
pubmed: 11016764
Clin Radiol. 2005 Aug;60(8):869-77
pubmed: 16039922
Nucl Med Commun. 2007 Apr;28(4):273-80
pubmed: 17325590
Eur J Cancer. 2006 Feb;42(3):342-50
pubmed: 16364631
Eur J Radiol. 2013 Dec;82(12):2189-93
pubmed: 24041437
CA Cancer J Clin. 2015 Jan-Feb;65(1):5-29
pubmed: 25559415
Arch Surg. 2004 Aug;139(8):831-6; discussion 836-7
pubmed: 15302691
J Nucl Med. 2014 Jan;55(1):15-22
pubmed: 24263087
Am J Otolaryngol. 2014 May-Jun;35(3):347-52
pubmed: 24503246
J Nucl Med. 1998 Nov;39(11):1892-7
pubmed: 9829578
Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord). 2009;130(4-5):211-4
pubmed: 20597399
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Apr 10;29(11):1479-87
pubmed: 21383281
Dermatol Surg. 2005 Apr;31(4):442-6; discussion 446-7
pubmed: 15871320
Radiology. 2007 Aug;244(2):566-74
pubmed: 17641374
N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 9;377(19):1824-1835
pubmed: 28891423
Dermatology. 2000;200(2):167-9
pubmed: 10773712
Radiology. 2004 Mar;230(3):603-4
pubmed: 14990825
BMJ. 2016 Jun 22;353:i3139
pubmed: 27334281
Oncologist. 2002;7(4):271-8
pubmed: 12185291
Nucl Med Biol. 1996 Aug;23(6):737-43
pubmed: 8940715
Anticancer Res. 2010 May;30(5):1799-805
pubmed: 20592382
Radiology. 1982 Jul;144(1):27-9
pubmed: 7089262
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jun;17(6):1657-61
pubmed: 20151211
J Nucl Med. 2007 Nov;48(11):1756-60
pubmed: 17942802
J Ultrasound Med. 2003 Oct;22(10):1017-22; quiz 1023-5
pubmed: 14606556
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 18;31:88
pubmed: 23078807
Cancer. 2000 Sep 1;89(5):1019-25
pubmed: 10964332
Int J Cancer. 2013 Dec 15;133(12):3000-7
pubmed: 23754707
Br J Dermatol. 2004 Apr;150(4):677-86
pubmed: 15099363
Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2007 Dec;22(6):740-7
pubmed: 18158764
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 20;27(33):5614-9
pubmed: 19786669
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013 Jan;39(1):30-6
pubmed: 23122637
Clin Chem. 2005 Aug;51(8):1335-41
pubmed: 15961549
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007 Sep;34(9):1366-75
pubmed: 17390135
Stat Med. 1998 Apr 30;17(8):857-72
pubmed: 9595616
JAMA. 2002 Oct 9;288(14):1719-20
pubmed: 12365954
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993 Jul-Aug;17(4):582-9
pubmed: 8331230
Orv Hetil. 2002 May 26;143(21 Suppl 3):1272-5
pubmed: 12077913
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011 Nov 01;6:70
pubmed: 22044607
Eur J Cancer. 2000 May;36(7):895-900
pubmed: 10785595
Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 13;1:62
pubmed: 23237499
Indian J Surg. 2012 Aug;74(4):278-83
pubmed: 23904713
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2507-16
pubmed: 21639808
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Nov;17(11):1558-1568
pubmed: 27622997
Eur J Radiol. 2010 Sep;75(3):376-83
pubmed: 19497694
Melanoma Res. 2008 Oct;18(5):346-52
pubmed: 18781133
Clin Nucl Med. 2001 Oct;26(10):832-6
pubmed: 11564919
Clin Dermatol. 2011 Nov-Dec;29(6):602-13
pubmed: 22014982
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007 Dec;7(12):1707-16
pubmed: 18062745
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Apr;85(4):732-8
pubmed: 26971416
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Sep;14(9):2437-9
pubmed: 17574500
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1991 Mar-Apr;12(2):293-300
pubmed: 1902031
J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Oct;58(10):982-90
pubmed: 16168343
Radiol Oncol. 2014 Jan 22;48(1):29-34
pubmed: 24587776
J Nucl Med. 2011 Jan;52(1):5-7
pubmed: 21149485
J Invest Dermatol. 2009 Jul;129(7):1666-74
pubmed: 19131946
Arch Surg. 2006 Mar;141(3):284-8
pubmed: 16549694
Arch Dermatol. 1996 Aug;132(8):875-6
pubmed: 8712836
N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 9;377(19):1813-1823
pubmed: 28891408
Vojnosanit Pregl. 2010 Jan;67(1):25-31
pubmed: 20225631
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):30-9
pubmed: 25399551
Nucl Med Commun. 1999 Mar;20(3):255-61
pubmed: 10093075
Melanoma Res. 1996 Aug;6(4):325-9
pubmed: 8873053
Melanoma Res. 2013 Oct;23(5):408-13
pubmed: 23883947
Neuroradiology. 1981;22(3):123-7
pubmed: 7312160
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006 Aug;33(8):887-92
pubmed: 16586078
Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2016 Mar-Apr;35(2):96-101
pubmed: 26597332
Vestn Khir Im I I Grek. 2009;168(1):50-3
pubmed: 19432146
Clin Nucl Med. 2003 Dec;28(12):961-5
pubmed: 14663316
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000 Sep;126(9):1091-6
pubmed: 10979122
Am J Otolaryngol. 2014 Jan-Feb;35(1):66-9
pubmed: 24051234
Arch Surg. 2010 Feb;145(2):137-42
pubmed: 20157080
Radiol Med. 2016 Jun;121(6):502-9
pubmed: 26754293
Br J Cancer. 2011 Nov 22;105(11):1795-803
pubmed: 22033277
J Nucl Med. 2017 Jul;58(7):1019-1024
pubmed: 28522743
Acta Derm Venereol. 2002;82(1):25-9
pubmed: 12013193
Melanoma Res. 2002 Oct;12(5):479-90
pubmed: 12394190
J Nucl Med. 2004 Aug;45(8):1323-7
pubmed: 15299056
Acta Oncol. 2007;46(5):685-90
pubmed: 17562446
Surg Oncol. 2013 Sep;22(3):195-200
pubmed: 23886614
J Radiol. 1998 Apr;79(4):313-7
pubmed: 9757255
Ann Surg. 2012 Aug;256(2):350-6
pubmed: 22691370
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2003 Oct;29(8):662-4
pubmed: 14511614
Clin Positron Imaging. 1999 Mar;2(2):93-98
pubmed: 14516545
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1789-1801
pubmed: 29658430
J Clin Oncol. 1993 Apr;11(4):638-43
pubmed: 8478659
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2011 Mar;9(3):212-22
pubmed: 21352483
CA Cancer J Clin. 1994 Jan-Feb;44(1):7-26
pubmed: 8281473
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Jan;196(1):W8-12
pubmed: 21178038
Clin Nucl Med. 2000 Jan;25(1):48-51
pubmed: 10634531
Nucl Med Commun. 2007 Sep;28(9):688-95
pubmed: 17667747
World J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 10;5(1):19-27
pubmed: 24527399
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011 May;38(5):822-31
pubmed: 21210112
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Apr 1;33(10):1191-6
pubmed: 25713437
Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Apr;16(4):941-7
pubmed: 19101766
Ultraschall Med. 2015 Apr;36(2):149-53
pubmed: 24764213
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003 Mar;17(3):343-9
pubmed: 12594725
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Mar;194(3):735-45
pubmed: 20173153
Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Apr;13(4):525-32
pubmed: 16474909
Clin Exp Metastasis. 2014 Jan;31(1):81-5
pubmed: 23975156
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Apr;43(4):695-706
pubmed: 26519292
Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2008 Oct;135(10):691-9
pubmed: 18929924
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Jul;1(4):433-40
pubmed: 26181250
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 07;(4):CD004835
pubmed: 19821334
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2008 Feb;41(1):23-49, v
pubmed: 18261525
J Clin Oncol. 2001 Aug 15;19(16):3622-34
pubmed: 11504744
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jun 20;24(18):2858-65
pubmed: 16782925
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2012 Nov;26(11):1431-5
pubmed: 22017492
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1987 Feb 27;112(9):341-4
pubmed: 2434296
J Surg Oncol. 2007 May 1;95(6):524-5; author reply 523
pubmed: 17221851
Oral Oncol. 2016 Sep;60:48-54
pubmed: 27531872
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2015 Oct;29(10):1938-44
pubmed: 25753249
Semin Roentgenol. 2002 Apr;37(2):129-39
pubmed: 12134366
Arch Dermatol. 1996 Jul;132(7):833-4
pubmed: 8678582
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019 Jan;80(1):208-250
pubmed: 30392755
Nucl Med Commun. 2003 Mar;24(3):281-9
pubmed: 12612469
Nucl Med Commun. 2002 May;23(5):475-81
pubmed: 11973489
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Sep;50(13):2280-8
pubmed: 24999208
Eur J Cancer. 2016 Aug;63:201-17
pubmed: 27367293
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jan 19;103(2):129-42
pubmed: 21081714
Radiol Med. 2006 Aug;111(5):702-8
pubmed: 16791462
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Apr;19(4):1100-6
pubmed: 22193886
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Nov 10;24(32):5178; author reply 5178
pubmed: 17093288
Melanoma Res. 2008 Feb;18(1):68-9
pubmed: 18227711
Arch Dermatol. 2012 Jan;148(1):30-6
pubmed: 21931016
Am J Otolaryngol. 2014 Jan-Feb;35(1):12-8
pubmed: 24140088
J Nucl Med. 2012 Jun;53(6):845-55
pubmed: 22534830
Cancer. 2001 Jun 15;91(12):2409-16
pubmed: 11413532
Stat Methods Med Res. 2017 Aug;26(4):1896-1911
pubmed: 26116616
Melanoma Res. 2010 Aug;20(4):357-9
pubmed: 20613456
Am J Clin Dermatol. 2018 Jun;19(3):303-317
pubmed: 29164492
Melanoma Res. 2005 Jun;15(3):191-8
pubmed: 15917701
Clin Nucl Med. 2016 Jun;41(6):e266-73
pubmed: 27055144
Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Dec;13(12):1682-9
pubmed: 17063307
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Jul;23(7):2323-9
pubmed: 26920386
Ann Surg Oncol. 2002 Aug;9(7):646-53
pubmed: 12167578
J Ultrasound Med. 2010 May;29(5):791-802
pubmed: 20427792
Invest Radiol. 2002 Aug;37(8):421-7
pubmed: 12138357
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2010 Jan-Feb;39(1):30-6
pubmed: 19931111
Dermatol Surg. 2003 Mar;29(3):245-8
pubmed: 12614417
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Nov;67(6):472-492
pubmed: 29028110
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Dec;59(12):1331-2; author reply 1332-3
pubmed: 17098577
Melanoma Res. 2003 Apr;13(2):183-8
pubmed: 12690303
Q J Nucl Med. 2000 Jun;44(2):153-67
pubmed: 10967625
Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2011 May;138(5):377-83
pubmed: 21570561
Int J Dermatol. 2006 Aug;45(8):1004-6
pubmed: 16911409
Eur J Surg Oncol. 1998 Feb;24(1):51-4
pubmed: 9542517
J Clin Oncol. 2001 May 15;19(10):2674-8
pubmed: 11352959
ISRN Surg. 2011;2011:276908
pubmed: 22084751
Oncol Rep. 2003 Mar-Apr;10(2):505-10
pubmed: 12579298
J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2017 Jan;4(1):011013
pubmed: 28401173
Br J Surg. 2002 Apr;89(4):389-96
pubmed: 11952577
Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1985 Dec;68:161-89
pubmed: 4088297
Semin Nucl Med. 2004 Oct;34(4):242-53
pubmed: 15493002
Zentralbl Chir. 1996;121(6):469-73
pubmed: 8767333
J Surg Oncol. 2001 Aug;77(4):237-42
pubmed: 11473371
Ann Intern Med. 1992 Jul 15;117(2):135-40
pubmed: 1605428
Eur J Nucl Med. 2000 Jan;27(1):70-5
pubmed: 10654150
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Jun;17(6):757-767
pubmed: 27161539
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr 20;25(12):1588-95
pubmed: 17443001
J Radiol. 2001 May;82(5):563-71
pubmed: 11416794
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Mar 15;22(6):1118-25
pubmed: 15020614
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Apr 2;158(7):544-54
pubmed: 23546566
Int J Cancer. 2013 Jan 15;132(2):385-400
pubmed: 22532371
J Nucl Med. 2003 Dec;44(12):1927-32
pubmed: 14660718
Ups J Med Sci. 2013 May;118(2):91-7
pubmed: 23570455
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2014 Feb;28(2):176-85
pubmed: 23331931
J Surg Oncol. 1997 Mar;64(3):181-9
pubmed: 9121147
Br J Dermatol. 2011 Jun;164(6):1235-40
pubmed: 21332457
Melanoma Res. 2004 Aug;14(4):269-76
pubmed: 15305157
Eur J Cancer. 1997 Oct;33(11):1805-8
pubmed: 9470837
Acad Radiol. 1998 Sep;5 Suppl 2:S300-2
pubmed: 9750837
Br J Cancer. 2002 Jul 15;87(2):151-7
pubmed: 12107834
N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 13;370(7):599-609
pubmed: 24521106
BMJ. 2012 Jul 24;345:e4757
pubmed: 22833605
Mol Imaging Biol. 2007 Jan-Feb;9(1):50-7
pubmed: 17051322
Dermatol Surg. 2010 Apr;36(4):439-45
pubmed: 20187901
Br J Dermatol. 2005 Jan;152(1):66-70
pubmed: 15656802
Br J Dermatol. 2009 Sep;161(3):496-503
pubmed: 19624540
Ugeskr Laeger. 2010 Apr 12;172(15):1126-30
pubmed: 20427004
Int J Dermatol. 2010 Sep;49(9):1056-8
pubmed: 20883270
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Mar 1;19(5):1021-34
pubmed: 23460533
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Nov;18(12):3300-8
pubmed: 21537867
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1992 Jul-Aug;16(4):568-71
pubmed: 1629416
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Feb;170(2):459-63
pubmed: 9456964
Nucl Med Commun. 2011 Jun;32(6):544-5
pubmed: 21505291
Lancet Oncol. 2004 Nov;5(11):673-80
pubmed: 15522655
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Oct 20;27(30):4994-5000
pubmed: 19738131
J Ultrasound Med. 2011 Apr;30(4):547-60
pubmed: 21460155
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Jun;78(3):430-5
pubmed: 19945240
Cancer. 2001 Apr 15;91(8):1530-42
pubmed: 11301402
Br J Dermatol. 1995 Apr;132(4):556-62
pubmed: 7748746
Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Apr;73(4):750-6
pubmed: 21288518
Invest Radiol. 2012 Dec;47(12):725-41
pubmed: 23070095
Eur Radiol. 2012 Nov;22(11):2451-7
pubmed: 22653282
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Nov;54(11):1758-64
pubmed: 17087705
World J Surg Oncol. 2013 Feb 04;11:36
pubmed: 23379355
Cancer Cell. 2010 Dec 14;18(6):683-95
pubmed: 21156289
Cancer. 2007 Sep 1;110(5):1107-14
pubmed: 17620286
Eur J Cancer. 1997 Feb;33(2):200-3
pubmed: 9135488
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Dec 04;12:CD011902
pubmed: 30521682
Dermatology. 2006;213(3):187-91
pubmed: 17033166
Epidemiology. 1997 Jan;8(1):12-7
pubmed: 9116087
Clin Nucl Med. 2016 Mar;41(3):189-93
pubmed: 26447374
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 Jul;30(7):995-1003
pubmed: 12739070
Ann Surg Oncol. 1997 Jul-Aug;4(5):396-402
pubmed: 9259966
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Dec;195(6):W474-5; author reply W476
pubmed: 21098184
Head Neck. 2014 Sep;36(9):1313-6
pubmed: 23956077
JAMA Oncol. 2016 Jan;2(1):136-7
pubmed: 26401901
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jun;102(6):1204-8
pubmed: 17324125
Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Jun;16(6):1537-42
pubmed: 19184226
Acta Med Croatica. 2012 Oct;66 Suppl 1:123-6
pubmed: 23193834
J Am Coll Radiol. 2008 Aug;5(8):924-31
pubmed: 18657789
Ann Surg Oncol. 2004 Aug;11(8):731-8
pubmed: 15249335
J Clin Oncol. 1999 May;17(5):1508-15
pubmed: 10334538
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Dec 20;27(36):6199-206
pubmed: 19917835
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2006 May;18(4):360-2
pubmed: 16703756
Ann Surg. 1998 May;227(5):764-9; discussion 769-71
pubmed: 9605668
Br J Dermatol. 2010 Aug;163(2):238-56
pubmed: 20608932
Br J Dermatol. 2010 May;162(5):1146-7
pubmed: 20346037
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995 Apr;32(4):595-9
pubmed: 7896948
Br J Cancer. 1999 Jul;80(10):1672-7
pubmed: 10408417
JAMA. 1995 Dec 6;274(21):1703-5
pubmed: 7474276
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2012 Jan;26(1):79-85
pubmed: 21395693
Int J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug;19(4):716-21
pubmed: 23900625
Cancer. 2000 Jun 25;90(3):186-93
pubmed: 10896332
Eur J Cancer. 1990;26(7):827-30
pubmed: 2145905
J Int Med Res. 2007 Jul-Aug;35(4):547-53
pubmed: 17697533
Oncology. 1987;44(2):87-9
pubmed: 3574855
Ann Oncol. 2009 Aug;20 Suppl 6:vi14-21
pubmed: 19617293
Oral Oncol. 2012 Oct;48(10):918-922
pubmed: 22425152
Melanoma Res. 2011 Oct;21(5):446-9
pubmed: 21849913
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006 Jul;33(7):854-5
pubmed: 16699770
Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2008 Jun;1(2):103-9
pubmed: 19434281
Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Sep;20(9):3098-105
pubmed: 23612885
Radiology. 2008 Dec;249(3):836-44
pubmed: 19011184
Acta Oncol. 2010;49(2):192-200
pubmed: 20059314
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Jan;111(1):502-3
pubmed: 12496638
J Dermatol. 2011 Sep;38(9):880-6
pubmed: 21658116
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 Sep;33(7):911-3
pubmed: 17207956
Cancer. 1981 Jun 1;47(11):2581-4
pubmed: 7260853
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012 Sep;65(9):1216-9
pubmed: 22525255
Nucl Med Commun. 2010 Sep;31(9):766-72
pubmed: 20585271
Dermatology. 2006;212(1):47-52
pubmed: 16319474
Eur J Radiol. 1997 May;24(3):216-21
pubmed: 9232392
Melanoma Res. 2008 Feb;18(1):56-60
pubmed: 18227709
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Dec 7;103(23):1771-7
pubmed: 21940673
Eur J Nucl Med. 1997 Dec;24(12):1522-5
pubmed: 9391188
Acta Radiol. 2011 Jun 1;52(5):540-6
pubmed: 21498286
Eur J Radiol. 2012 Apr;81(4):714-8
pubmed: 21353412
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2014 Apr;58(2):149-54; quiz 266
pubmed: 24690243
Nuklearmedizin. 2003 Aug;42(4):167-72
pubmed: 12937695
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Oct;17(10):2773-8
pubmed: 20422454
J Clin Oncol. 2003 Feb 1;21(3):520-9
pubmed: 12560444
Eur J Dermatol. 2010 Nov-Dec;20(6):835-6
pubmed: 20923752
J Comput Tomogr. 1981 Mar;5(1):21-4
pubmed: 7273823
N Engl J Med. 2014 Nov 13;371(20):1867-76
pubmed: 25265494
Oncology. 2010;79(5-6):370-5
pubmed: 21430406
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2000 Apr;42(4):606-11
pubmed: 10727305
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2014 Nov;2014(49):187-97
pubmed: 25417232
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Feb 1;70(2):322-9
pubmed: 17889447
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 16;(5):CD010307
pubmed: 25978975
Surg Oncol. 2014 Mar;23(1):11-6
pubmed: 24556310
Acad Radiol. 2004 Jun;11(6):678-85
pubmed: 15172370
BMJ. 2015 Oct 28;351:h5527
pubmed: 26511519
Arch Dermatol. 2005 Feb;141(2):183-9
pubmed: 15724014
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Aug;67(2):194.e1-8
pubmed: 22030020
Australas Radiol. 1999 May;43(2):148-52
pubmed: 10901892
Am J Clin Pathol. 2013 Nov;140(5):635-42
pubmed: 24124141
Biol Res. 2014;47:34
pubmed: 25204018

Auteurs

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH