Systematic review evaluates hypoxia PET imaging's effectiveness in glioma diagnosis and prognosis, suggesting improved outcomes.
Background/Objectives: While MRI is effective for glioma diagnosis, it has limitations in grading, treatment planning, and prognostication. Since hypoxia is associated with higher-grade gliomas and poorer outcomes, PET imaging with hypoxia-specific tracers has been shown to improve glioma assessment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of hypoxia PET imaging in glioma diagnosis and prognostication. Methods: Systematic searches were conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus through 31 January 2025. Only studies assessing the diagnostic or prognostic value of PET with 18F-labelled nitroimidazole (18F-FMISO, 18F-FAZA, 18F-FRP170, or 18F-FETNIM) or 62Cu-labelled ATSM hypoxia tracers in patients with gliomas were included. Hierarchical models were used to evaluate pooled performance on differentiating glioblastoma from lower-grade gliomas. Results: Thirty-eight articles (n = 1156 patients) were eligible for inclusion, and eleven articles (n = 296 patients) were suitable for meta-analytical calculations. The extent of hypoxia on PET imaging was generally correlated with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status and histological angiogenesis. Hypoxia PET was effective at differentiating glioblastoma from lower-grade gliomas and at predicting overall and progression-free survival. In a pooled analysis, 18F-FMISO PET displayed high sensitivity (98%) and specificity (94%) for differentiating glioblastoma from lower-grade gliomas. Conclusions: Hypoxia PET has the potential to predict tumour biology, and it may be a reliable modality in combination with MRI to provide complementary information for glioma diagnosis, grading, treatment planning, and prognostication. It may be particularly useful for ruling out glioblastoma in patients with otherwise equivocal imaging; however, this would need to be validated prospectively with standardized image acquisition and interpretation criteria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ladak et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: