Literature DB >> 31230088

Early lesion detection with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer.

M Wondergem1, B H E Jansen2,3, F M van der Zant1, T M van der Sluis4, R J J Knol1, L W M van Kalmthout5, O S Hoekstra6, R J A van Moorselaar4, D E Oprea-Lager6, A N Vis4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT is increasingly used in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR), mostly using gallium-68 (168Ga)-labelled radiotracers. Alternatively, fluorine-18 (18F)-labelled PSMA tracers are available, such as 18F-DCFPyL, which offer enhanced image quality and therefore potentially increased detection of small metastases. In this study we evaluate the lesion detection efficacy of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in patients with BCR and determine the detection efficacy as a function of their PSA value.
METHODS: A total of 248 consecutive patients were evaluated and underwent scanning with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT for BCR between November 2016 and 2018 in two hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were examined after radical prostatectomy (52%), external-beam radiation therapy (42%) or brachytherapy (6%). Imaging was performed 120 min after injection of a median dose of 311 MBq 18F-DCFPyL.
RESULTS: In 214 out of 248 PET/CT scans (86.3%), at least one lesion suggestive of cancer recurrence was detected ('positive scan'). Scan positivity increased with higher PSA values: 17/29 scans (59%) with PSA values <0.5 ng/ml; 20/29 (69%) with PSA 0.5 to <1.0 ng/ml; 35/41 (85%) with PSA 1.0 to <2.0 ng/ml; 69/73 (95%) with PSA 2.0 to <5.0 ng/ml; and 73/76 (96%) with PSA ≥5.0 ng/ml. Interestingly, suspicious lesions outside the prostatic fossa were detected in 39-50% of patients with PSA <1.0 ng/ml after radical prostatectomy (i.e. candidates for salvage radiotherapy).
CONCLUSION: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT offers early detection of lesions in patients with BCR, even at PSA levels <0.5 ng/ml. These results appear to be comparable to those reported for 68Ga-PSMA and 18F-PSMA-1007, with potentially increased detection efficacy compared to 68Ga-PSMA for patients with PSA <2.0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  18F-DCFPyL PET/CT; Biochemically recurrent; PSMA; Prostate cancer

Year:  2019        PMID: 31230088      PMCID: PMC6647179          DOI: 10.1007/s00259-019-04385-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


Introduction

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men in the Western world [1, 2]. Initial therapy includes local intervention with curative intent, such as radical prostatectomy (RP), external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT), or brachytherapy (BT). However, between 28% and 53% of all such treated patients will develop biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR) [3]. BCR is defined as two consecutive prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values ≥0.2 ng/ml after RP, or any PSA increase of 2.0 ng/ml above the nadir following EBRT and BT [4-6]. Accurate imaging studies are important for patients with BCR, as early lesion localisation directs further treatment, which might include stereotactic metastasis-directed radiotherapy, salvage radiotherapy, salvage lymph node dissection, or the initiation of systemic treatment [3]. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) using radiotracers that bind to the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is increasingly used for PCa diagnostics. PSMA is a class II transmembrane glycoprotein that provides a valuable target for radiolabelled imaging, as it is significantly overexpressed in malignant prostate cells [7]. So far, studies have primarily investigated gallium-68 (68Ga)-labelled PSMA tracers (68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC), which have demonstrated promising results in patients with BCR [8]. Alternatively, fluorine-18 (18F)-labelled PSMA tracers are available, most notably 18F-DCFPyL [9, 10] and 18F-PSMA-1007 [11]. Because of a shorter positron range and higher positron yield, the 18F radionuclide provides higher PET image resolution than 68Ga, which may improve the detection of small metastases (e.g. at low PSA values) [12]. Although 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is increasingly used in clinical practice, only minimal data are yet available on the diagnostic efficacy in patients with BCR [13]. Hence, the aim of this study was to determine the lesion detection efficacy of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in patients with BCR and establish the efficacy as a function of patients’ current PSA values.

Material and methods

This retrospective analysis consists of 248 patients with BCR consecutively scanned with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT from November 2016 until December 2018 in two Dutch hospitals (Amsterdam University Medical Centres, VU University; Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar). Patients with BCR were included regardless of prior curative treatment (RP, EBRT, BT). Patients with persistent PSA after curative treatment or patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer were excluded. If multiple 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT scans for BCR were performed for a patient, only the first examination was included. No exclusion criteria were deployed other than the coexistence of other malignancies. Patient characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Table 1

Patient characteristics

Characteristics n = 248
Age, years (median, IQR)71 (67–75)
n (%)
PSA at PET/CT (ng/ml)<0.529 (12%)
0.5–129 (12%)
1–241 (17%)
2–573 (29%)
>576 (31%)
PSA doubling time (months) (median, IQR)6 (3–12)
Gleason score633 (13%)
797 (39%)
836 (15%)
9–1048 (19%)
Unknown34 (14%)
Tumour stageT1c16 (6%)
T282 (33%)
T3109 (44%)
T47 (3%)
Unknown34 (14%)
Initial therapyRadical prostatectomy128 (52%)
External-beam radiation105 (42%)
Brachytherapy15 (6%)
ADT at PET/CT20 (8%)
Prior salvage radiation therapy41 (17%)

IQR = interquartile range

Patient characteristics IQR = interquartile range

Imaging

18F-DCFPyL was synthesised under good manufacturing practice (GMP) conditions at the on-site cyclotron facilities of both hospitals [14]. PET acquisitions were made 120 min after injection of a median dose of 311 MBq 18F-DCFPyL (interquartile range 284–325 MBq). Imaging was performed with a Philips Ingenuity TF (Philips Healthcare, the Netherlands/USA) and a Siemens Biograph TruePoint-16 (Siemens Healthineers, Germany) PET/CT scanner. The scan trajectory included mid-thigh to skull vertex, with 4 min (Philips scanner) and 5 min (Siemens scanner) per bed position. PET acquisitions were combined with a low-dose CT or contrast-enhanced CT scan (30–110 mAs, 110–130 kV). All images were corrected for decay, scatter, and random coincidences; photon attenuation correction was performed using CT images. Images were reconstructed with the vendor-provided BLOB-based ordered-subset expectation maximisation algorithm on the Philips system (3 iterations; 33 subsets) [15] and the ordered-subset expectation maximisation algorithm on the Siemens system (4 iterations; 16 subsets, including a 5-mm Gaussian filter). The reconstructed images had a maximum image matrix size of 256 × 256, voxel size 2.67 × 2.67 × 4 mm (Siemens data) and matrix size 288 × 288, voxel size 2 × 2 × 2 mm (Philips data).

Image interpretation

Scan interpretation was performed in the participating centres by four nuclear medicine physicians in total, with ample experience in PCa PET reading (>200 scans). Dual-reading was performed for all scans, the final conclusion was drawn up in consensus, recording the localisation of detected lesions (i.e. prostate/prostatic fossa, loco-regional lymph nodes, distant lymph nodes, bones, visceral organs). A scan was considered ‘positive’ if at least one lesion suggestive of PCa recurrence was detected. Prostate lesions and lymph nodes were considered positive when the activity in those lesions exceeded blood pool activity. Bone lesions were considered positive if the activity was higher than general bone marrow activity, without CT findings clearly demarcating benign lesions such as hemangioma.

Statistical analysis

Numerical variables were summarised as medians and interquartile ranges; categorical variables with proportions (%). Scan positivity was calculated for the following PSA strata (<0.5; 0.5 to <1.0; 1.0 to <2.0; 2.0 to <5.0; ≥5.0 ng/ml) and includes a 95% confidence interval (CI). Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of scan positivity (e.g. PSA value at the time of PET/CT, PSA doubling time, Gleason score, tumour stage, use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) at the time of PET/CT). Differences in the distribution of detected lesions (e.g. local recurrence, regional lymph nodes) between PSA strata were tested using Fisher’s exact test with Holm–Bonferroni correction.

Results

In 214 out of 248 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT scans (86.3%, 95% CI 82.0–90.6%), at least one lesion suggestive of PCa recurrence was detected (positive scan). Lesion detection increased with higher PSA values, with a detection efficacy of 59% (17/19 scans), 69% (20/29), 85% (35/41), 95% (69/73) and 96% (73/76), respectively, for scans at PSA values <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1.0 to <2.0, 2.0 to <5.0 and ≥ 5.0 ng/ml (Figs. 1, 2). Excluding patients with incomplete clinical history (e.g. Gleason score, see Table 1) for the evaluation revealed similar results (Supplementary data 1). Aside from current PSA value, no other parameter (Gleason score, tumour stage, current ADT use, PSA-doubling time, previous salvage radiotherapy) was a significant predictor of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT scan positivity in regression analysis (Supplementary data 2).
Fig. 1

(a) Detection efficacy of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in patients with BCR and (b) the proportion of positive scans (including 95% confidence intervals)

Fig. 2

Illustration of detection of bone metastases in a patient with BCR after RP and low PSA value (0.7 ng/ml). Left: maximum-intensity projection. Right: coronal CT, PET and fusion images

(a) Detection efficacy of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in patients with BCR and (b) the proportion of positive scans (including 95% confidence intervals) Illustration of detection of bone metastases in a patient with BCR after RP and low PSA value (0.7 ng/ml). Left: maximum-intensity projection. Right: coronal CT, PET and fusion images Scans were most frequently positive due to detection of regional lymph node metastases (136/248 scans, 54.8%), followed by local recurrence in the prostate or prostatic fossa (92/248 scans, 37.1%); bone metastases (73/248, 329.4%); distant lymph node metastases (49/248, 19.8%); and visceral metastases (12/248, 4.8%) (Fig. 3, Supplementary data 3). The relative distribution of detected lesions was not significantly different at the various PSA strata (p = 0.22 to > 0.9, Supplementary data 4).
Fig. 3

(a) Characteristics of the detected lesions in all patients with BCR (b) Characteristics of detected lesions in patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy, not yet treated with salvage radiotherapy

(a) Characteristics of the detected lesions in all patients with BCR (b) Characteristics of detected lesions in patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy, not yet treated with salvage radiotherapy A subgroup analysis was performed for patients with BCR after RP and low PSA values (<1.0 ng/ml) (n = 43), as they may be candidates for curative salvage radiotherapy to the prostate bed [3]. In our cohort, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT revealed suspicious lesions outside of the prostatic fossa in 39–50% of these patients (Figs. 2, 3). All patients who underwent 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT with a PSA <0.5 ng/ml revealed ≤3 metastases (‘oligometastatic disease’, Fig. 4). Conversely, in patients with a PSA ≥5.0 ng/ml, only 29% (22 out of 76) were diagnosed with 1–3 metastases (34% with 1–5 metastases) (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4

Number of detected lesions per PSA stratum. Red and green bar indicating patients with oligometastases (defined as either ≤3 or ≤ 5 metastases, with or without a local recurrence). Grey bar representing patients with polymetastases (>5 metastases)

Number of detected lesions per PSA stratum. Red and green bar indicating patients with oligometastases (defined as either ≤3 or ≤ 5 metastases, with or without a local recurrence). Grey bar representing patients with polymetastases (>5 metastases)

Discussion

In this study we evaluated the lesion detection efficacy of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in 248 patients with BCR. Suspected metastases were identified in the majority of PET examinations and even at PSA values <0.5 ng/ml, lesions were observed in 59% of patients. These results show clear improvement over the results with conventional imaging modalities, as well as choline PET/CT [16-18]. Compared to a recent meta-analysis on 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT [8], our study demonstrates equivalent results in patients with PSA values >2.0 ng/ml (i.e. 95% lesion detection with both tracers). Potentially improved detection is observed compared to 68Ga-PSMA in all PSA strata <2.0 ng/ml (most notably, 59% detection with 18F-DCFPyL when PSA <0.5 ng/ml vs. 45% with 68Ga-PSMA; Table 2) [8].
Table 2

Comparison of results of various PSMA radiotracers

PublicationTracer N Detection rates per PSA strata (ng/ml)
<0.50.5 to <1.01.0 to <2.0≥2.0
Perera 2019 [8]68Ga-PSMA-11479045%59%75%95%
<0.50.5 to <1.01.0 to <2.0≥2.0
Giesel 2018 [24]18F-PSMA-100725162%74%91%94%
≤0.50.51 to ≤1.01.1 to ≤2.0>2.0
Rahbar 2018 [25]18F-PSMA-100710086%89%100%100%
<0.50.5 to <1.01.0 to <2.0≥2.0
Present study 201918F-DCFPyL24859%69%85%96%
Comparison of results of various PSMA radiotracers Recently revised European Association of Urology guidelines recommend performing PSMA PET/CT at BCR after RP if the PSA level is >0.2 ng/ml and if the results will influence subsequent treatment decisions [19]. PSMA PET/CT is recommended in case of BCR after EBRT in patients fit for curative salvage treatment. The guidelines also recommend offering a PSMA PET to men with a persistent PSA >0.2 ng/ml after prostatectomy to exclude metastatic disease. Those recommendations are in line with our findings that even at the lowest PSA values, sites of PCa recurrence could be detected with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in the majority of patients. Further, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT revealed lesions outside the prostatic fossa even at very low PSA levels (e.g. 39% with PSA <0.5 ng/ml) (Figs. 2, 3). These findings are clinically relevant, because patients with BCR after RP are candidates for local salvage radiation treatment to the prostatic fossa, and such treatment is likely to be ineffective in the presence of (lymph node) metastases. Indeed, Emmett et al. recently demonstrated that 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT may be effective for stratification of patients into groups with a high probability of response to salvage radiotherapy (negative PET or detection of local recurrence only) versus lower probability of response (detected lesions outside the prostatic fossa). In that study (n = 164), PSMA PET findings predicted salvage therapy outcomes better than established predictors, most notably current PSA values [20]. To our knowledge, there is only one prior study on 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT for patients with BCR, analysing n = 62 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT scans in direct comparison with 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT [13]. Dietlein et al. [13] found higher sensitivity with 18F-DCFPyL in patients with PSA values between 0.5–3.5 ng/ml (88% with 18F-DCFPyL versus 66% with 68Ga-PSMA, p = 0.042). Compared to Dietlein et al., we observed a higher detection efficacy, especially at PSA values <0.5 ng/ml (59% versus 13%, respectively). This difference might be due to the image interpretation protocol applied by Dietlein et al., which required corresponding findings on CT for all PET-positive lesions. Based on current standardised reporting systems, such a requirement is no longer applied for PSMA PET interpretation at our institutions [21, 22]. Recently, another 18F-labelled PSMA tracer was introduced: 18F-PSMA-1007 [23]. 18F-PSMA-1007 is only minimally excreted via the urinary tract, which potentially improves visualisation of tumour deposits adjacent to the urinary bladder (mainly local recurrence). Our results with 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT appear comparable to the outcomes of 251 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans analysed by Giesel et al. (e.g. 62% positive scans with 18F-PSMA-1007 when PSA <0.5 ng/ml [24]) (Table 2). Conversely, Rahbar et al. report notably more positive 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans compared to both Giesel et al. and the present study (86% positive scans when PSA <0.5 ng/ml; 100% positive scans when PSA >1.0 ng/ml [25]). Rahbar et al. included only 100 patients, however, and may have included more advanced PCa cases. For example, 38% of RP patients analysed by Rahbar et al. had already received salvage radiotherapy (compared to 17% in our cohort), and 27% of patients received ADT around the time of examination (compared to 8% in our cohort). In general, precise comparison of the results with different PSMA tracers (including 68Ga-PSMA) is difficult. Most studies are retrospective, and many factors other than the applied radiotracers may have influenced the diagnostic results (e.g. included patient population, PET scanner technique, image reconstruction methods, experience of the PET readers). In particular for cohorts including patients treated with EBRT, such as our cohort, somewhat higher detection rates are generally found in comparison with populations treated with RP only. In terms of detection of local recurrence, no evident benefit of 18F-PSMA-1007 over 18F-DCFPyL is seen. Giesel et al. included only patients with BCR after RP and detected local recurrence in 25% of patients. Rahbar et al. noted local recurrence in 37% of all patients (treated with either EBRT or RP) [24, 25]. In our study, local recurrence was detected in 24% of all patients treated with RP and in 37% of the entire population. Contrary to our finding that PSA at PET/CT is the only predictor of scan positivity, a recent study by Rauscher et al. found that concurrent ADT was also a predictor of a positive scan in multivariable analysis [26]. It should be noted that in our cohort, only 20 patients were receiving ADT at the time of PET/CT, the majority of whom received ADT in combination with EBRT; Rauscher et al. included only patients after RP, all with a PSA <1.0 ng/ml. Overall, the role of ADT in scan outcomes remains incompletely understood, for ADT may upregulate PSMA expression initially [27], but reduce lesion detection efficacy upon longer exposure [28]. Patients who received ADT after prostatectomy due to known metastatic disease without salvage options—in other words, in a palliative setting—were not included in this cohort. Although there is no definition as to where BCR ends in the course of prostate cancer progression, in our opinion, a cohort of patients with BCR should only include patients who are candidates for salvage options before PSMA PET/CT is performed. Accurate identification of patients with oligometastatic disease is of current interest [29], although the definition of oligometastatic disease remains unclear (either ≤3 or ≤5 metastases). The clinical benefit of (oligo)metastases-directed treatment has not yet been established [3]. Nevertheless, it seems evident that any success of metastases-directed strategies will depend on accurate imaging studies, as well as adequate timing of diagnostic procedures. From our data it can be observed that performing 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT soon after diagnosis of BCR (i.e. at lower PSA values) favours detection of oligometastases (Fig. 4). At higher PSA levels (>5.0 ng/ml), more patients are diagnosed with polymetastases (>5). Yet even in these patients, a substantial proportion had oligometastastic disease on 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT (Fig. 4). An important limitation of the present study, and studies on PSMA PET for BCR in general, is the lack of histopathologic confirmation of PET results [8, 12, 30]. PSMA PET-detected lesions are often smaller than 1 cm, making biopsy procedures difficult and burdensome for patients. In our study, histologic confirmation of PET findings (CT-guided biopsy, lymph node dissection, prostate biopsy) had been performed in only 15 of our patients, although follow-up of patients from outside our PET centres was often lacking. In 12 of these patients (80%), the malignant nature of detected lesions was confirmed. Overall, these numbers are insufficient to assess the extent of false-positive outcomes (the specificity) in our study. High specificity of PSMA PET has been demonstrated in primary PCa patients, however, where imaging findings can be correlated to histopathology from lymph node dissection (96% specificity with 68Ga-PSMA [30]; 96–99% specificity with 18F-DCFPyL [31]). We were also unable to evaluate the sensitivity of 18F-DCFPyL on a lesion basis, since the true number of PCa metastases remains unknown. PET is inherently limited by its image resolution to the detection of small metastases (<2–4 mm). We should therefore assume that 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT still underestimates the extent of disease. Clinically, it is important to realise that improved detection of metastases is only of benefit to patients if followed by appropriate, proven-effective therapeutic strategies. The identification of additional metastases may delay treatment of local recurrences, trigger metastasis-directed treatment, or result in initiation of systemic therapy. None of the clinical outcomes of these (PSMA PET-based) decisions have yet been sufficiently studied in clinical trials [3, 29, 32].

Conclusion

18F-DCFPyL PET/CT appears effective for detecting metastases in patients with BCR, even at PSA values <0.5 ng/ml. The detection efficacy appears at least comparable to published results with 68Ga-PSMA and 18F-PSMA-1007. (DOCX 36 kb)
  28 in total

1.  2-(3-{1-Carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid, [18F]DCFPyL, a PSMA-based PET imaging agent for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ying Chen; Mrudula Pullambhatla; Catherine A Foss; Youngjoo Byun; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Srinivasan Senthamizhchelvan; George Sgouros; Ronnie C Mease; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Michael S Cookson; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine Tangen; J Brantley Thrasher; Ian Thompson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference.

Authors:  Mack Roach; Gerald Hanks; Howard Thames; Paul Schellhammer; William U Shipley; Gerald H Sokol; Howard Sandler
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Initial Evaluation of [(18)F]DCFPyL for Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-Targeted PET Imaging of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Zsolt Szabo; Esther Mena; Steven P Rowe; Donika Plyku; Rosa Nidal; Mario A Eisenberger; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Hong Fan; Robert F Dannals; Ying Chen; Ronnie C Mease; Melin Vranesic; Akrita Bhatnagar; George Sgouros; Steve Y Cho; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  Defining prostate specific antigen progression after radical prostatectomy: what is the most appropriate cut point?

Authors:  C L Amling; E J Bergstralh; M L Blute; J M Slezak; H Zincke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression as a predictor of prostate cancer progression.

Authors:  Sven Perner; Matthias D Hofer; Robert Kim; Rajal B Shah; Haojie Li; Peter Möller; Richard E Hautmann; Juergen E Gschwend; Rainer Kuefer; Mark A Rubin
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2007-02-22       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 7.  Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Laura Evangelista; Fabio Zattoni; Andrea Guttilla; Giorgio Saladini; Filiberto Zattoni; Patrick M Colletti; Domenico Rubello
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 7.794

Review 8.  A systematic review of the role of imaging before salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy biochemical recurrence.

Authors:  M J Beresford; D Gillatt; R J Benson; T Ajithkumar
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 4.126

9.  Localizing sites of disease in patients with rising serum prostate-specific antigen up to 1ng/ml following prostatectomy: How much information can conventional imaging provide?

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Alexandre G Martin-Malburet; Toshikazu Takeda; Renato B Corradi; James Eastham; Andreas Wibmer; Evis Sala; Michael J Zelefsky; Wolfgang A Weber; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 10.  PET imaging of prostate-specific membrane antigen in prostate cancer: current state of the art and future challenges.

Authors:  S P Rowe; M A Gorin; M E Allaf; K J Pienta; P T Tran; M G Pomper; A E Ross; S Y Cho
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 5.554

View more
  13 in total

1.  Comparing the diagnostic performance of radiotracers in prostate cancer biochemical recurrence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Weili Ma; Jiwei Mao; Jianfeng Yang; Ting Wang; Zhen Hua Zhao
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Prospective Evaluation of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in Detection of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer: Comparison With mpMRI.

Authors:  Sonia Gaur; Esther Mena; Stephanie A Harmon; Maria L Lindenberg; Stephen Adler; Anita T Ton; Joanna H Shih; Sherif Mehralivand; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Ronnie C Mease; Martin G Pomper; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Predictors of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Positivity in Patients with Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Local Therapy.

Authors:  Esther Mena; Steven P Rowe; Joanna H Shih; Liza Lindenberg; Baris Turkbey; Aloyse Fourquet; Frank I Lin; Stephen Adler; Philip Eclarinal; Yolanda L McKinney; Deborah E Citrin; William Dahut; Bradford J Wood; Richard Chang; Elliot Levy; Maria Merino; Michael A Gorin; Martin G Pomper; Peter A Pinto; Janet F Eary; Peter L Choyke; Kenneth J Pienta
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 11.082

4.  Detection of failure patterns using advanced imaging in patients with biochemical recurrence following low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kilian E Salerno; Baris Turkbey; Liza Lindenberg; Esther Mena; Erica E Schott; Alexandra K Brennan; Soumyajit Roy; Uma Shankavaram; Krishnan Patel; Theresa Cooley-Zgela; Yolanda McKinney; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter Choyke; Deborah E Citrin
Journal:  Brachytherapy       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 2.441

5.  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

6.  Management impact of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence after definitive treatment: a multicenter retrospective study.

Authors:  Dennie Meijer; Pim J van Leeuwen; Pepijn M J Oosterholt; Yves J L Bodar; Henk G van der Poel; N Harry Hendrikse; Maarten L Donswijk; Maurits Wondergem; Annelies E Vellekoop; R Jeroen A van Moorselaar; Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; André N Vis
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  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

Review 8.  Salvage therapy for prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Nicholas G Zaorsky; Jeremie Calais; Stefano Fanti; Derya Tilki; Tanya Dorff; Daniel E Spratt; Amar U Kishan
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2021-08-06       Impact factor: 14.432

9.  Lutetium-177-PSMA-I&T as metastases directed therapy in oligometastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer, a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Bastiaan M Privé; Marcel J R Janssen; Inge M van Oort; Constantijn H J Muselaers; Marianne A Jonker; Michel de Groot; Niven Mehra; J Fred Verzijlbergen; Tom W J Scheenen; Patrik Zámecnik; Jelle O Barentsz; Martin Gotthardt; Walter Noordzij; Wouter V Vogel; Andries M Bergman; Henk G van der Poel; André N Vis; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Winald R Gerritsen; J Alfred Witjes; James Nagarajah
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  The Diagnostic Role of 18F-Choline, 18F-Fluciclovine and 18F-PSMA PET/CT in the Detection of Prostate Cancer With Biochemical Recurrence: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Rang Wang; Guohua Shen; Mingxing Huang; Rong Tian
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.