Sensitivity of core needle biopsy in the diagnosis of lymphoma: A meta-analysis

IF 2.5 4区医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY

Current Problems in Cancer Pub Date : 2025-05-14 DOI:10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2025.101203

Chloe Cottone , Katherine Kozlowski , Joshua Sorrentino , Kelly Stahovic , Xiaoyi Ma , Vishal Gupta , Ayham Al Afif

{"title":"Sensitivity of core needle biopsy in the diagnosis of lymphoma: A meta-analysis","authors":"Chloe Cottone , Katherine Kozlowski , Joshua Sorrentino , Kelly Stahovic , Xiaoyi Ma , Vishal Gupta , Ayham Al Afif","doi":"10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2025.101203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Lymphoma commonly presents in the head and neck. Studies on the sensitivity of core needle biopsy (CNB) in diagnosing subtypes of lymphoma are mixed. We performed a meta-analysis of the existing literature to uncover the sensitivity of CNB in diagnosing lymphoma subtypes.</div></div><div><h3>Data sources</h3><div>PubMed, Embase by Elsevier</div></div><div><h3>Review methods</h3><div>Articles included examined the sensitivity of CNB by lymphoma subtype. We excluded articles that did not use CNB and lacked sufficient data. A random effect logistic regression model was used to pool sensitivity data. Pooled sensitivity estimates and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals were obtained from model estimates and all analyses were conducted at a significance of 0.05.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Screening yielded 32 articles (15 including Head and Neck nodes) with 3,027 biopsies. Across all subtypes, estimated sensitivity was 86.4 % (CI:76.1–96.7). There was significant heterogeneity among disease subtypes (<em>p</em> < 0.001). Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), Mantle Cell (MCL) and Diffuse Large B Cell (DLBCL) lymphoma exhibited highest sensitivities at 97.8 % (CI:94.2–99.1), 97.0 % (CI:92.2–98.9), and 94.5 % (CI:91.44–96.5), respectively. Low Grade B Cell not otherwise specified, Natural Killer/T cell, and Angioimmunoblastic Lymphomas demonstrated lowest sensitivities at 71.0 % (CI:44.5–88.2), 75.4 % (CI:23.0–96.9), and 77.1 % (CI:54.2–90.5), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>CNB is highly sensitive in the diagnosis of some lymphoma subtypes, particularly MCL, DLBCL and CLL. Knowledge of CNB performance relative to each subtype can aid in clinical decision making, as it pertains to treatment and the need for excisional biopsy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55193,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Cancer","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101203"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Problems in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147027225000303","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Lymphoma commonly presents in the head and neck. Studies on the sensitivity of core needle biopsy (CNB) in diagnosing subtypes of lymphoma are mixed. We performed a meta-analysis of the existing literature to uncover the sensitivity of CNB in diagnosing lymphoma subtypes.

Data sources

PubMed, Embase by Elsevier

Review methods

Articles included examined the sensitivity of CNB by lymphoma subtype. We excluded articles that did not use CNB and lacked sufficient data. A random effect logistic regression model was used to pool sensitivity data. Pooled sensitivity estimates and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals were obtained from model estimates and all analyses were conducted at a significance of 0.05.

Results

Screening yielded 32 articles (15 including Head and Neck nodes) with 3,027 biopsies. Across all subtypes, estimated sensitivity was 86.4 % (CI:76.1–96.7). There was significant heterogeneity among disease subtypes (p < 0.001). Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), Mantle Cell (MCL) and Diffuse Large B Cell (DLBCL) lymphoma exhibited highest sensitivities at 97.8 % (CI:94.2–99.1), 97.0 % (CI:92.2–98.9), and 94.5 % (CI:91.44–96.5), respectively. Low Grade B Cell not otherwise specified, Natural Killer/T cell, and Angioimmunoblastic Lymphomas demonstrated lowest sensitivities at 71.0 % (CI:44.5–88.2), 75.4 % (CI:23.0–96.9), and 77.1 % (CI:54.2–90.5), respectively.

Conclusion

CNB is highly sensitive in the diagnosis of some lymphoma subtypes, particularly MCL, DLBCL and CLL. Knowledge of CNB performance relative to each subtype can aid in clinical decision making, as it pertains to treatment and the need for excisional biopsy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

核心针活检诊断淋巴瘤的敏感性：一项荟萃分析

目的：淋巴瘤常见于头颈部。关于核心针活检（CNB）诊断淋巴瘤亚型的敏感性的研究褒贬不一。我们对现有文献进行了荟萃分析，以揭示CNB在诊断淋巴瘤亚型中的敏感性。数据来源pubmed， Embase by elsevier综述方法纳入的文章按淋巴瘤亚型检测了CNB的敏感性。我们排除了没有使用CNB和缺乏足够数据的文章。采用随机效应logistic回归模型对敏感性数据进行汇总。从模型估计值中获得合并敏感性估计值和相应的95%置信区间，所有分析均以0.05的显著性进行。结果32篇（包括头颈部淋巴结15篇）共3027例活检。在所有亚型中，估计敏感性为86.4% （CI: 76.1-96.7）。不同疾病亚型间存在显著异质性(p <；0.001)。慢性淋巴细胞白血病（CLL）、套细胞淋巴瘤（MCL）和弥漫性大B细胞淋巴瘤（DLBCL）的敏感性最高，分别为97.8% （CI: 94.2-99.1）、97.0% （CI: 92.2-98.9）和94.5% （CI: 91.44-96.5）。低级别B细胞（未另行指定）、自然杀伤/T细胞和血管免疫母细胞淋巴瘤的最低敏感性分别为71.0% （CI: 44.5-88.2）、75.4% （CI: 23.0-96.9）和77.1% （CI: 54.2-90.5）。结论cnb对某些淋巴瘤亚型的诊断具有较高的敏感性，尤其是对MCL、DLBCL和CLL的诊断。了解每个亚型的CNB表现可以帮助临床决策，因为它与治疗和切除活检的需要有关。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Current Problems in Cancer 医学-肿瘤学

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

15 days

期刊介绍： Current Problems in Cancer seeks to promote and disseminate innovative, transformative, and impactful data on patient-oriented cancer research and clinical care. Specifically, the journal''s scope is focused on reporting the results of well-designed cancer studies that influence/alter practice or identify new directions in clinical cancer research. These studies can include novel therapeutic approaches, new strategies for early diagnosis, cancer clinical trials, and supportive care, among others. Papers that focus solely on laboratory-based or basic science research are discouraged. The journal''s format also allows, on occasion, for a multi-faceted overview of a single topic via a curated selection of review articles, while also offering articles that present dynamic material that influences the oncology field.