PET using radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is now being more widely adopted as a valuable tool to evaluate patients with prostate cancer (PC). Recently, 3 different criteria for interpretation of PSMA PET were published: the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) criteria, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation criteria, and the PSMA Reporting and Data System. We compared these 3 criteria in terms of interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement. Methods: Data from 104 patients prospectively enrolled in research protocols at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. The cohort consisted of 2 groups: 47 patients (mean age, 64.2 y old) who underwent Glu-NH-CO-NH-Lys-(Ahx)-[68Ga(HBED-CC)] (68Ga-PSMA11) PET/MRI for initial staging of biopsy-proven intermediate- or high-risk PC, and 57 patients (mean age, 70.5 y old) who underwent 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT because of biochemically recurrent PC. Three nuclear medicine physicians independently evaluated all 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/MRI and PET/CT studies according to the 3 interpretation criteria. Two of them reevaluated all studies 6 mo later in the same manner and masked to the initial reading. The Gwet agreement coefficient was calculated to evaluate interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement based on the following sites: local lesion (primary tumor or prostate bed after radical prostatectomy), lymph node metastases, and other metastases. Results: In the PET/MRI group, interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. In the PET/CT group, interreader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect except for judgment of distant metastases based on the PSMA Reporting and Data System (Gwet agreement coefficient, 0.57; moderate agreement), in which the most frequent cause of disagreement was lung nodules. Intrareader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. Intercriteria agreement for each site was also substantial to almost perfect. Conclusion: Although the 3 published criteria have good interreader and intrareader reproducibility in evaluating 68Ga-PSMA11 PET, there are some factors causing interreader disagreement. Further work is needed to address this issue.
PET using radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is now being more widely adopted as a valuable tool to evaluate patients with prostate cancer (PC). Recently, 3 different criteria for interpretation of PSMA PET were published: the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) criteria, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation criteria, and the PSMA Reporting and Data System. We compared these 3 criteria in terms of interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement. Methods: Data from 104 patients prospectively enrolled in research protocols at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. The cohort consisted of 2 groups: 47 patients (mean age, 64.2 y old) who underwent Glu-NH-CO-NH-Lys-(Ahx)-[68Ga(HBED-CC)] (68Ga-PSMA11) PET/MRI for initial staging of biopsy-proven intermediate- or high-risk PC, and 57 patients (mean age, 70.5 y old) who underwent 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT because of biochemically recurrent PC. Three nuclear medicine physicians independently evaluated all 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/MRI and PET/CT studies according to the 3 interpretation criteria. Two of them reevaluated all studies 6 mo later in the same manner and masked to the initial reading. The Gwet agreement coefficient was calculated to evaluate interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement based on the following sites: local lesion (primary tumor or prostate bed after radical prostatectomy), lymph node metastases, and other metastases. Results: In the PET/MRI group, interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. In the PET/CT group, interreader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect except for judgment of distant metastases based on the PSMA Reporting and Data System (Gwet agreement coefficient, 0.57; moderate agreement), in which the most frequent cause of disagreement was lung nodules. Intrareader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. Intercriteria agreement for each site was also substantial to almost perfect. Conclusion: Although the 3 published criteria have good interreader and intrareader reproducibility in evaluating 68Ga-PSMA11 PET, there are some factors causing interreader disagreement. Further work is needed to address this issue.
Authors: Rudolf A Werner; Thorsten Derlin; Steven P Rowe; Lena Bundschuh; Gabriel T Sheikh; Martin G Pomper; Sebastian Schulz; Takahiro Higuchi; Andreas K Buck; Frank M Bengel; Ralph A Bundschuh; Constantin Lapa Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Daniela A Ferraro; Andreas M Hötker; Olivio F Donati; Irene A Burger; Anton S Becker; Iliana Mebert; Riccardo Laudicella; Anka Baltensperger; Niels J Rupp; Jan H Rueschoff; Julian Müller; Ashkan Mortezavi; Marcelo T Sapienza; Daniel Eberli Journal: Eur J Hybrid Imaging Date: 2022-07-18
Authors: Julian M M Rogasch; Frank Hofheinz; Lutz van Heek; Conrad-Amadeus Voltin; Ronald Boellaard; Carsten Kobe Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2022-02-10
Authors: Ian Alberts; Jan-Niklas Hünermund; Christos Sachpekidis; Clemens Mingels; Viktor Fech; Karl Peter Bohn; Axel Rominger; Ali Afshar-Oromieh Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Saskia Fassbind; Daniela A Ferraro; Jean-Jacques Stelmes; Christian D Fankhauser; Matthias Guckenberger; Philipp A Kaufmann; Daniel Eberli; Irene A Burger; Benedikt Kranzbühler Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.668