Table 3.
Summary of studies on MRI to exclude patients with extensive nodal involvement.
| Study | Year | Field strength | No. of patients | No. (%) of patients with extensive nodal involvement | No. of false negatives | No. of true negatives | NPV (%) | FNR (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies in which extensive nodal involvement was defined as pN2-3 | |||||||||
| Unenhanced MRI (T1w/T2w) | |||||||||
| Nijnatten van et al. [27] | Reader 1 | 2016 | 1.5 T | 377 | 16 (4.2%) | 3 | 318 | 99 | 19 |
| Reader 2 | 2016 | 1.5 T | 377 | 16 (4.2%) | 2 | 297 | 99 | 13 | |
| DCE-MRI | |||||||||
| Hwang et al. [40] | 2013 | 1.5 T | 349 | 18 (5.2%) | 4 | 272 | 99 | 22 | |
| Hyun et al. [41] | 2016 | 3.0 T | 310 | 12 (3.9%) | 1 | 256 | 99.6 | 8 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Studies in which extensive nodal involvement was defined as ≥3 positive nodes | |||||||||
| Unenhanced MRI (T1w/T2w) | |||||||||
| Barco et al. [16] | 2016 | 1.5 T | 1351 | 182 (13.5%) | 100 | 1066 | 91 | 55 | |
| DCE-MRI | |||||||||
| Hieken et al. [17] | 2013 | 1.5 T | 505 | 52 (10.3%) | 10 | 327 | 97 | 19 | |
| Kim et al. [18] | 2019 | 3.0 T | 256 | 17 (6.6%) | 2 | 179 | 99 | 12 | |
MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; DCE-MRI = dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (using gadolinium-based contrast agents); No. of false negatives = number of patients with normal/negative MRI but histologically extensive nodal involvement; no. of true negatives = number of patients with normal/negative MRI and histologically no/limited nodal involvement; NPV = negative predictive value; FNR = false-negative rate.