Literature DB >> 30074667

Gallium-68-prostate-specific membrane antigen (68 Ga-PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) predicts complete biochemical response from radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer.

Pim J van Leeuwen1, Maarten Donswijk2, Rohan Nandurkar3, Phillip Stricker4,5, Bao Ho6, Stijn Heijmink7, Esther M K Wit1, Corinne Tillier1, Erik van Muilenkom1, Quoc Nguyen4, Henk G van der Poel1, Louise Emmett3,4,6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of gallium-68-prostate-specific membrane antigen (68 Ga-PSMA)-11 positron emission tomography (PET) /computed tomography (CT) in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed results of 140 men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. All men underwent 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) before radical prostatectomy (RP) with extended pelvic lymph node (LN) dissection. For each patient, the clinical and pathological features were recorded. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was documented at staging scan, and after RP, at a median (interquartile range) of 110 (49-132) days. A PSA level of ≥0.03 ng/mL was classified as biochemical persistence (BCP). Logistic regression was performed for association of clinical variables and BCP.
RESULTS: In these 140 patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer, 27.1% had PSMA PET/CT-positive findings in the pelvic LNs. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of LN metastases were 53% and 88% (PSMA PET/CT) and 14% and 99% (mpMRI), respectively. The overall BCP rate was 25.7%. The BCP rate was 16.7% in men who were PSMA PET/CT LN-negative compared to 50% in men who were PSMA PET/CT LN-positive (P < 0.05). The presence of PSMA-positive pelvic LNs was more predictive of BCP after RP than cT-stage, PSA level, and the Gleason score, adjusted for surgical margins status.
CONCLUSIONS: 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT is highly predictive of BCP after RP, and should play an important role informing men with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer.
© 2018 The Authors BJU International © 2018 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; accuracy; biochemical recurrence; positron emission tomography; prostate-specific membrane antigen; radical prostatectomy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30074667     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  14 in total

Review 1.  Molecular imaging in oncology: Current impact and future directions.

Authors:  Steven P Rowe; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 286.130

2.  E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET.

Authors:  Francesco Ceci; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Louise Emmett; Judit A Adam; Jamshed Bomanji; Johannes Czernin; Matthias Eiber; Uwe Haberkorn; Michael S Hofman; Thomas A Hope; Rakesh Kumar; Steven P Rowe; Sarah M Schwarzenboeck; Stefano Fanti; Ken Herrmann
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Predicting early outcomes in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer using prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Dennie Meijer; Pim J van Leeuwen; Maarten L Donswijk; Thierry N Boellaard; Ivo G Schoots; Henk G van der Poel; Harry N Hendrikse; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; André N Vis
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 5.969

4.  Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) imaging: the past is prologue and the future is scintillating.

Authors:  Steven P Rowe; Michael A Gorin; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-04

Review 5.  Use of gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography for detecting lymph node metastases in primary and recurrent prostate cancer and location of recurrence after radical prostatectomy: an overview of the current literature.

Authors:  Henk B Luiting; Pim J van Leeuwen; Martijn B Busstra; Tessa Brabander; Henk G van der Poel; Maarten L Donswijk; André N Vis; Louise Emmett; Phillip D Stricker; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  The CAPRA-S score versus subtypes of minimal residual disease to predict biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Nigel P Murray; Socrates Aedo; Cynthia Fuentealba; Eduardo Reyes; Anibal Salazar; Eghon Guzman; Shenda Orrego
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2020-06-25

7.  Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) for local staging of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sungmin Woo; Soleen Ghafoor; Anton S Becker; Sangwon Han; Andreas G Wibmer; Hedvig Hricak; Irene A Burger; Heiko Schöder; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Eur J Hybrid Imaging       Date:  2020-09-09

8.  PSMA PET for primary lymph node staging of intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer: an expedited systematic review.

Authors:  Lars J Petersen; Helle D Zacho
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.909

9.  Can 68Ga-prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography provide an accurate lymph node staging for patients with medium/high risk prostate cancer? A diagnostic meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lei Peng; Jinze Li; Chunyang Meng; Jinming Li; Chengyu You; Dandan Tang; Tangqiang Wei; Wei Xiong; Yunxiang Li
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Pelvic lymph-node staging with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT prior to extended pelvic lymph-node dissection in primary prostate cancer - the SALT trial.

Authors:  B H E Jansen; Y J L Bodar; G J C Zwezerijnen; D Meijer; J P van der Voorn; J A Nieuwenhuijzen; M Wondergem; T A Roeleveld; R Boellaard; O S Hoekstra; R J A van Moorselaar; D E Oprea-Lager; A N Vis
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.