Critical appraisal:Rodriguez Rivera AM, Alabbas H, Ramjaun A, Meguerditchian AN 2014

From Cancer Guidelines Wiki

Critical Appraisal

Article being appraised

Rodriguez Rivera AM, Alabbas H, Ramjaun A, Meguerditchian AN. Value of positron emission tomography scan in stage III cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2014 Mar;23(1):11-6 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24556310.


Applicable clinical question

Key Facts

Study Design

systematic review — 9 articles were included, but does not specify the study designs of each.

Study aims:

To conduct a systematic and comprehensive literature search to assess the collective experience of PET scan in the detection of distant metastases in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma.

Number of Patients:

623

This study yielded 9 relevant studies, a total of 623 patients, and 943 FDG-PET scans.
Reported outcome(s):

Sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET scan.

Results of outcome(s):

The overall sensitivity of FDG-PET was 89.42% (95% CI: 65.07-97.46), and the overall specificity was 88.78% (95% CI: 77.04-94.91%).
The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 7.97 (95% CI: 3.58-17.71), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.12 (95% CI: 0.03-0.47).
The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was found to be 66.84 (95% CI: 10.66-418.89).

Includes an economic evaluation

no

Evidence ratings

Level of evidence

III-2

Risk of bias
Low risk of bias Comments:

Risk of bias assessment: systematic review

Studies included in the review
Was an adequate search strategy used?
Very thorough – included appropriate search terms and databases
Were the inclusion criteria appropriate and applied in an unbiased way?
Yes – pre-specified inclusion criteria applied independently by two people
Were the studies assessed for quality (relating to the minimisation of biases)?
Yes – appropriate quality issues were assessed independently by two people
Were the characteristics and results of individual studies appropriately summarised?
Yes – summary descriptive tables of subjects, interventions, outcomes etc are provided and estimates of treatment effect displayed
The following questions are only relevant for systematic reviews that pooled data
Were the methods used for pooling the data appropriate?
Yes
If there was heterogeneity, were sources of heterogeneity explored?
Yes
Result of appraisal

Jutta's tick icon.png Included




Completed by

Tamsin Parrish


Jutta's tick icon.png This appraisal has been completed.


Article
Rodriguez Rivera AM, Alabbas H, Ramjaun A, Meguerditchian AN. Value of positron emission tomography scan in stage III cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2014 Mar;23(1):11-6 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24556310.
Assigned to
User:Tamsin.parrish
Topic area
Guidelines:Melanoma
Clinical question
Form
Form:Critical appraisal


Section below only relevant for Cancer Council Project Officer

Edit appraisal assignment