Stefano Fanti1, Silvia Minozzi2, Paolo Castellucci3, Sara Balduzzi4, Ken Herrmann5,6, Bernd Joachim Krause7, Wim Oyen8, Arturo Chiti9,10. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, S.Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, PAD 30, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy. stefano.fanti@aosp.bo.it. 2. Cochrane Review Group on Drugs and Alcohol, Department of Epidemiology, Lazio Regional Health Service, Via di Santa Costanza, 53, 00198, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, S.Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, PAD 30, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy. 4. Department of Diagnostic Medicine, Clinical and Public Health, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via del Pozzo 71, 41124, Modena, Italy. 5. Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Ave., Medical Plaza 200, Suite B114-61, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-7370, USA. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Str. 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany. 7. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Gertrudenplatz 1, 18057, Rostock, Germany. 8. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 9. Nuclear Medicine, Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milano, Italy. 10. Humanitas University, Via A. Manzoni 113, 20089, Rozzano, Milano, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: For the last decade PET and PET/CT with (11)C-choline have been proposed for the evaluation of prostate cancer (PC), but the diagnostic performance of (11)C-choline PET/CT is still a matter of debate. We performed a comprehensive review of the most important clinical application of (11)C-choline PET, restaging of patients with biochemical relapse, following a rigorous methodological approach and including assessment of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature assessing (11)C-choline PET/CT for its accuracy in the diagnosis and ability to detect the site of recurrence of PC in the restaging of patients with biochemical recurrence after initial treatment with curative intent. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library to determine the accuracy for the detection of the site of recurrence (prostate bed recurrences, metastatic spread to locoregional pelvic lymph nodes or distant metastases). Only studies with a reference standard (for prostatic bed histopathology, for histopathology or biopsy of distant metastases or a composite reference standard with clinical follow-up of at least 12 months, correlative imaging and clinical data) were included. RESULTS: Overall 425 studies were retrieved, of which 43 were judged as potentially relevant and 29 with 2,686 participants were finally included. Of these 29 studies, 18 reported results for any relapse, All 18 studies, with a total of 2,126 participants, reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 62 % (95 % CI 53 - 71 %). Of the 18 studies, 12 with 1,270 participants reported useful data to derive sensitivity and specificity. The pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % CI 83 - 93 %) and the pooled specificity was 89 % (95 % CI 73 - 96 %). Of 11 studies reporting results for local relapse, 9 with 993 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 27 % (95 % CI 16 - 38 %). Six studies with 491 participants reported sensitivity and specificity. The pooled sensitivity was 61 % (95 % CI 40 - 80 %) and the pooled specificity was 97 % (95 % CI 87 - 99 %). Ten studies reported results for lymph nodes and distant metastases. For nodal disease, 7 studies with 752 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 36 % (95 % CI 22 - 50 %). For bone metastases, 8 studies with 775 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 25 % (95 % CI 16 - 34 %). CONCLUSION: There is a significant amount of (11)C-choline PET data published showing a high degree of consistency in inclusion criteria, acquisition protocols and scan interpretation criteria. Furthermore, the quality of the data derived limited to the same standard of reference was acceptable. Despite a high variability in the observed prevalence of any relapse, the diagnostic performance of (11)C-choline PET was in line with previous meta-analyses. Our data confirm the very good accuracy of (11)C-choline PET for detection of lymph node metastases and/or distant lesions in a single examination in patients with biochemical relapse.
PURPOSE: For the last decade PET and PET/CT with (11)C-choline have been proposed for the evaluation of prostate cancer (PC), but the diagnostic performance of (11)C-choline PET/CT is still a matter of debate. We performed a comprehensive review of the most important clinical application of (11)C-choline PET, restaging of patients with biochemical relapse, following a rigorous methodological approach and including assessment of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature assessing (11)C-choline PET/CT for its accuracy in the diagnosis and ability to detect the site of recurrence of PC in the restaging of patients with biochemical recurrence after initial treatment with curative intent. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library to determine the accuracy for the detection of the site of recurrence (prostate bed recurrences, metastatic spread to locoregional pelvic lymph nodes or distant metastases). Only studies with a reference standard (for prostatic bed histopathology, for histopathology or biopsy of distant metastases or a composite reference standard with clinical follow-up of at least 12 months, correlative imaging and clinical data) were included. RESULTS: Overall 425 studies were retrieved, of which 43 were judged as potentially relevant and 29 with 2,686 participants were finally included. Of these 29 studies, 18 reported results for any relapse, All 18 studies, with a total of 2,126 participants, reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 62 % (95 % CI 53 - 71 %). Of the 18 studies, 12 with 1,270 participants reported useful data to derive sensitivity and specificity. The pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % CI 83 - 93 %) and the pooled specificity was 89 % (95 % CI 73 - 96 %). Of 11 studies reporting results for local relapse, 9 with 993 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 27 % (95 % CI 16 - 38 %). Six studies with 491 participants reported sensitivity and specificity. The pooled sensitivity was 61 % (95 % CI 40 - 80 %) and the pooled specificity was 97 % (95 % CI 87 - 99 %). Ten studies reported results for lymph nodes and distant metastases. For nodal disease, 7 studies with 752 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 36 % (95 % CI 22 - 50 %). For bone metastases, 8 studies with 775 participants reported detection rates. The pooled rate was 25 % (95 % CI 16 - 34 %). CONCLUSION: There is a significant amount of (11)C-choline PET data published showing a high degree of consistency in inclusion criteria, acquisition protocols and scan interpretation criteria. Furthermore, the quality of the data derived limited to the same standard of reference was acceptable. Despite a high variability in the observed prevalence of any relapse, the diagnostic performance of (11)C-choline PET was in line with previous meta-analyses. Our data confirm the very good accuracy of (11)C-choline PET for detection of lymph node metastases and/or distant lesions in a single examination in patients with biochemical relapse.
Entities:
Keywords:
11C-Choline; Positron emission tomography; Prostate cancer
Authors: Ludwig Rinnab; Joerg Simon; Richard E Hautmann; M V Cronauer; Kathrin Hohl; Andreas K Buck; Sven N Reske; Felix M Mottaghy Journal: World J Urol Date: 2009-02-21 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ludwig Rinnab; Felix M Mottaghy; Norbert M Blumstein; Sven N Reske; Richard E Hautmann; Kathrin Hohl; Peter Möller; Thomas Wiegel; Rainer Kuefer; Juergen E Gschwend Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: B J Krause; M Souvatzoglou; M Tuncel; K Herrmann; A K Buck; C Praus; T Schuster; H Geinitz; U Treiber; M Schwaiger Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-09-22 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Milan Grkovski; Karem Gharzeddine; Peter Sawan; Heiko Schöder; Laure Michaud; Wolfgang A Weber; John L Humm Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 10.057