Table 5.
Pseudoprogression versus true progression: Summary of literature results.
| Study (n) | Group (n) | Mean rCBV | Mean PSR (%) | rCBV threshold (Sn%; Sp%) | PSR threshold (%) (Sn%; Sp%) | Comments | Level of evidenceb |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kong 2011 (90) | TP (33) | 2.85a | NA | 1.49 (81.5; 77.8) | NA | Prospective. Not all cases histopathologically confirmed. | 4 |
| PsP (26) | 1.49a | NA | |||||
| Gahramanov 2013 (19) | TP (10) | > 1.5 | NA | 1.5 (not provided) | NA | Prospective. Assumption re overall survival rather than histopathological confirmation used to categorise groups. Mean rCBV and P values for each group not provided. | 4 |
| PsP (9) | < 1.5 | NA | |||||
| Young 2013 (20) | TP (16) | 2.75a | 84a | 1.8 (100; 75) | 90 (100; 63) | Prospective. Cases not histopathologically confirmed. | 4 |
| PsP (4) | 1.5a | 101a |
a
p < 0.05.
bSee Appendix A.
GBM: glioblastoma; HGG: high-grade glioma; MET: metastasis; NA: not studied; PSP: pseudo-progression; PSR: percentage of signal intensity recovery; rCBV: relative cerebral blood volume; Sn: sensitivity; Sp: specificity; TP: true tumour progression; vs.: versus