Reference | No. of patients | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Authors | No. | Year | ||||
Park et al. | 10 | 2000 | 36 | 100. | 94.4 | 97.2 |
Sun et al. | 11 | 2001 | 20 | 95.8* | 93.7* | 95* |
Nakamoto et al. | 12 | 2002 | 20 | 100. | 60. | 70. |
Belhocine et al. | 13 | 2002 | 38 | 100. | 77. | 92. |
Havrilesky et al. | 14 | 2003 | 28 | 85.7 | 86.7 | 86.2 |
Ryu et al. | 15 | 2003 | 249 | 90.3 | 76.1 | 77.9 |
Lai et al. | 16 | 2004 | 40 | 91. | 98. | 97. |
Total = 431 | Mean = 94.7 | Mean = 83.7 | Mean = 87.9 |
↵* Results were calculated from all regions of recurrent cervical cancer detected by 18F-FDG PET, including local recurrences, pelvic lymph nodes, paraaortic lymph nodes, and distant metastases (46 true-positives, 2 false-positives, 30 true-negatives, 2 false-negatives).