Stefano Fanti1, Silvia Minozzi2, Joshua James Morigi3, Frederik Giesel4, Francesco Ceci1, Christian Uprimny5, Michael S Hofman6, Matthias Eiber7, Sarah Schwarzenbock8, Paolo Castellucci1, Cristina Bellisario9, Stéphane Chauvie10, Fabrizio Bergesio10, Louise Emmett11, Uwe Haberkorn4, Irene Virgolini5, Markus Schwaiger7, Rodney J Hicks6, Bernd J Krause8, Arturo Chiti12. 1. Nuclear Medicine Unit, University of Bologna, S. Orsola Hospital Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Lazio Regional Health Service, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St. Vincent's Public Hospital, Sydney, Australia. joshuamorigi@me.com. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. 6. Centre for Molecular Imaging, Department of Cancer Imaging, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, 3000, Australia. 7. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany. 8. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre, Rostock, Germany. 9. Department of Cancer Screening, Centre for Epidemiology and Prevention in Oncology (CPO), University Hospital "Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino", Turin, Italy. 10. Medical Physics Division, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Cuneo, Italy. 11. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St. Vincent's Public Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 12. Nuclear Medicine, Humanitas Cancer Center, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
Abstract
METHODS: After primary treatment, biochemical relapse (BCR) occurs in a substantial number of patients with prostate cancer (PCa). PET/CT imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen based tracers (68Ga-PSMA) has shown promising results for BCR patients. However, a standardized image interpretation methodology has yet to be properly agreed. The aim of this study, which was promoted and funded by European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), is to define standardized image interpretation criteria for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT to detect recurrent PCa lesions in patients treated with primary curative intent therapy (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy) who presented a biochemical recurrence. In the first phase inter-rater agreement between seven readers from seven international centers was calculated on the reading of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT images of 49 patients with BCR. Each reader evaluated findings in five different sites of recurrence (local, loco-regional lymph nodes, distant lymph nodes, bone, and other). In the second phase the re-analysis was limited to cases with poor, slight, fair, or moderate agreement [Krippendorff's (K) alpha<0.61]. Finally, on the basis of the consensus readings, we sought to define a list of revised consensus criteria for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT interpretation. RESULTS: Between-reader agreement for the presence of anomalous findings in any of the five sites was only moderate (K's alpha: 0.47). The agreement improved and became substantial when readers had to judge whether the anomalous findings were suggestive for a pathologic, uncertain, or non-pathologic image (K's alpha: 0.64). K's alpha calculations for each of the five sites of recurrence were also performed and evaluated. First Delphi round was thus conducted. A more detailed definition of the criteria was proposed by the project coordinator, which was then discussed and finally agreed by the seven readers. After the second Delphi round only four cases of disagreement still remained. These were evaluated for a final round, allowing a final agreement table to be written. CONCLUSION: We hope that by developing these consensus guidelines on the interpretation of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT, clinicians reporting these studies will be able to provide more consistent clinical reports and that within clinical trials, abnormality classifications will be harmonized, allowing more robust assessment of its diagnostic performance.
METHODS: After primary treatment, biochemical relapse (BCR) occurs in a substantial number of patients with prostate cancer (PCa). PET/CT imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen based tracers (68Ga-PSMA) has shown promising results for BCR patients. However, a standardized image interpretation methodology has yet to be properly agreed. The aim of this study, which was promoted and funded by European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), is to define standardized image interpretation criteria for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT to detect recurrent PCa lesions in patients treated with primary curative intent therapy (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy) who presented a biochemical recurrence. In the first phase inter-rater agreement between seven readers from seven international centers was calculated on the reading of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT images of 49 patients with BCR. Each reader evaluated findings in five different sites of recurrence (local, loco-regional lymph nodes, distant lymph nodes, bone, and other). In the second phase the re-analysis was limited to cases with poor, slight, fair, or moderate agreement [Krippendorff's (K) alpha<0.61]. Finally, on the basis of the consensus readings, we sought to define a list of revised consensus criteria for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT interpretation. RESULTS: Between-reader agreement for the presence of anomalous findings in any of the five sites was only moderate (K's alpha: 0.47). The agreement improved and became substantial when readers had to judge whether the anomalous findings were suggestive for a pathologic, uncertain, or non-pathologic image (K's alpha: 0.64). K's alpha calculations for each of the five sites of recurrence were also performed and evaluated. First Delphi round was thus conducted. A more detailed definition of the criteria was proposed by the project coordinator, which was then discussed and finally agreed by the seven readers. After the second Delphi round only four cases of disagreement still remained. These were evaluated for a final round, allowing a final agreement table to be written. CONCLUSION: We hope that by developing these consensus guidelines on the interpretation of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT, clinicians reporting these studies will be able to provide more consistent clinical reports and that within clinical trials, abnormality classifications will be harmonized, allowing more robust assessment of its diagnostic performance.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biochemical recurrence; Consensus guidelines; Criteria; PSMA; Pet/Ct; Prostate cancer
Authors: Pasquale Martino; Vincenzo Scattoni; Andrea B Galosi; Paolo Consonni; Carlo Trombetta; Silvano Palazzo; Carmen Maccagnano; Giovanni Liguori; Massimo Valentino; Michele Battaglia; Libero Barozzi Journal: World J Urol Date: 2011-05-08 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: James L Mohler; Philip W Kantoff; Andrew J Armstrong; Robert R Bahnson; Michael Cohen; Anthony Victor D'Amico; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Thomas A Farrington; Celestia S Higano; Eric Mark Horwitz; Christopher J Kane; Mark H Kawachi; Michael Kuettel; Timothy M Kuzel; Richard J Lee; Arnold W Malcolm; David Miller; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; David Raben; Sylvia Richey; Mack Roach; Eric Rohren; Stan Rosenfeld; Edward Schaeffer; Eric J Small; Guru Sonpavde; Sandy Srinivas; Cy Stein; Seth A Strope; Jonathan Tward; Dorothy A Shead; Maria Ho Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Heather A Jacene; Sophie Leboulleux; Shingo Baba; Daniel Chatzifotiadis; Behnaz Goudarzi; Oleg Teytelbaum; Karen M Horton; Ihab Kamel; Katarzyna J Macura; Hua-Ling Tsai; Jeanne Kowalski; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-10-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Andrew J Stephenson; Peter T Scardino; Michael W Kattan; Thomas M Pisansky; Kevin M Slawin; Eric A Klein; Mitchell S Anscher; Jeff M Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Daniel W Lin; Jeffrey D Forman; Michael J Zelefsky; Larry L Kestin; Claus G Roehrborn; Charles N Catton; Theodore L DeWeese; Stanley L Liauw; Richard K Valicenti; Deborah A Kuban; Alan Pollack Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David Pfister; Michel Bolla; Alberto Briganti; Peter Carroll; Cesare Cozzarini; Steven Joniau; Hein van Poppel; Mack Roach; Andrew Stephenson; Thomas Wiegel; Michael J Zelefsky Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Gaël Amzalag; Olivier Rager; Claire Tabouret-Viaud; Michael Wissmeyer; Electra Sfakianaki; Thomas de Perrot; Osman Ratib; Raymond Miralbell; Giampiero Giovacchini; Valentina Garibotto; Thomas Zilli Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Rudolf A Werner; Ralph A Bundschuh; Lena Bundschuh; Stefano Fanti; Mehrbod S Javadi; Takahiro Higuchi; Alexander Weich; Kenneth J Pienta; Andreas K Buck; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Ken Herrmann; Constantin Lapa; Steven P Rowe Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Rudolf A Werner; Ralph A Bundschuh; Lena Bundschuh; Mehrbod S Javadi; Jeffrey P Leal; Takahiro Higuchi; Kenneth J Pienta; Andreas K Buck; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Constantin Lapa; Steven P Rowe Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Yafu Yin; Rudolf A Werner; Takahiro Higuchi; Constantin Lapa; Kenneth J Pienta; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Steven P Rowe Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Matthias Eiber; Louise Emmett; Wolfgang P Fendler; Courtney Lawhn-Heath; Steven P Rowe Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Christian Uprimny; Steffen Bayerschmidt; Alexander Stephan Kroiss; Josef Fritz; Bernhard Nilica; Anna Svirydenka; Clemens Decristoforo; Gianpaolo di Santo; Elisabeth von Guggenberg; Wolfgang Horninger; Irene Johanna Virgolini Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-05-08 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Francesco Ceci; Lorenzo Bianchi; Marco Borghesi; Giulia Polverari; Andrea Farolfi; Alberto Briganti; Riccardo Schiavina; Eugenio Brunocilla; Paolo Castellucci; Stefano Fanti Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 9.236