TABLE 2

Subgroup Analyses for Diagnostic Performance of 18F-FDG PET of Bone Marrow Infiltration in Lymphoma

AnalysisNo. of studies (patients)Independent estimates (95% CI)Likelihood ratio (95% CI)
Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)LR+LR−
Prospective design
    Yes7 (361)57 (42–70)91 (81–96)7.26 (3.15–16.7)0.56 (0.44–0.72)
    No/not specified6 (226)39 (20–62)92 (83–96)4.65 (2.45–8.85)0.81 (0.67–0.97)
Type of lymphoma
    HD5 (191)*76 (47–92)92 (79–97)9.02 (3.52–23.2)0.33 (0.14–0.77)
    NHL6 (239)43 (28–60)88 (75–94)3.53 (1.88–6.63)0.68 (0.57–0.81)
    Both/not separable3 (121)52 (24–79)97 (91–99)13.3 (4.02–44.4)0.61 (0.29–1.26)
Disease status
    Primary7 (297)72 (57–83)93 (85–97)8.93 (4.31–18.5)0.41 (0.25–0.68)
    RecurrentNANANANANA
    Both/not separable6 (270)38 (27–50)90 (79–96)3.91 (1.97–7.75)0.15 (0.06–0.37)
Type of BMB
    Unilateral3 (114)75 (53–89)87 (74–95)5.73 (2.84–11.5)0.30 (0.14–0.61)
    Bilateral4 (183)46 (32–60)87 (70–95)4.07 (1.50–11.1)0.61 (0.47–0.80)
    Not specified6 (290)42 (20–67)95 (90–98)8.39 (3.04–23.1)0.07 (0.02–0.26)
Blinding
    Yes9 (348)54 (41–66)89 (80–94)5.06 (2.97–8.63)0.60 (0.48–0.75)
    No4 (239)44 (15–79)94 (86–98)7.23 (2.09–25.1)0.80 (0.62–1.05)
PET measurement
    Qualitative11 (394)54 (41–67)89 (82–93)4.63 (3.00–7.14)0.64 (0.50–0.82)
    Quantitative2 (193)36 (19–57)96 (92–99)14.1 (1.54–1.30)0.62 (0.24–1.59)
  • * Thirty-two patients from Elstrom et al. (9) and 4 patients from Hong et al. (11) with HD were excluded from this subgroup analysis since all BMBs in these patients with HD were negative.

  • Moog (8) includes 8 patients with unilateral BMB, but these could not be separated.

  • NA = not available.

    All analyses are based on random-effects calculations.