Mittal 2011.
Study characteristics | |||
Patient sampling |
Country India Study design Retrospective Setting Hospital Dates of data collection N/R Population (n) 73 Inclusion criteria Histologically proven postoperative CRC resection undergoing PET/CT and conventional imaging to detect suspected recurrence triggered by a rising CEA Exclusion criteria N/R Participants included (n) 73 |
||
Patient characteristics and setting |
Age range 25 ‐ 80 Smoking status N/R Site of primary tumour Colorectal Stage of primary tumour N/R Perioperative investigations done to ensure no residual disease N/R Chemotherapy/radiotherapy? No Recurrences (n) 38 Site of recurrences N/R |
||
Index tests |
CEA timing Within 7 ‐ 10 days of imaging CEA technique Electro‐chemiluminescent immunoassay CEA threshold 3 µg/L Definition of positive 1 elevated value Which CEA value (s) used? At point of recurrence |
||
Target condition and reference standard(s) |
Reference standard PET/CT |
||
Flow and timing |
Timing of CEA vs reference standard (days) within 7‐10 days of CEA |
||
Comparative | |||
Notes | |||
Methodological quality | |||
Item | Authors' judgement | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns |
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection | |||
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? | No | ||
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? | No | ||
High | Low | ||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All CEA thresholds | |||
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | Yes | ||
Is the same method and instrument used for all CEA measurements? | Yes | ||
Is there an estimation of reproducibility of the method, for example the % coefficient of variation at specific concentrations? | No | ||
Is there an indication of method accuracy, for example, is there evidence of participation in an external quality assessment and proficiency testing scheme? | No | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard | |||
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? | Yes | ||
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? | Unclear | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing | |||
Did all patients receive the same reference standard? | Yes | ||
Were all patients included in the analysis? | Yes | ||
Was the index test repeated prior to the reference standard? | No | ||
Was the the timing between index test(s) and reference standard ascertainable? | Yes | ||
Did all patients receive a reference standard? | Yes | ||
Low |