Which PSMA PET/CT interpretation criteria most effectively diagnose prostate cancer? a retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING BMC Medical Imaging Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.1186/s12880-025-01557-9
Le Ma, Yaxin Hao, Luoping Zhai, Wanchun Zhang, Xiaoming Cao, Kaiyuan Jia
{"title":"Which PSMA PET/CT interpretation criteria most effectively diagnose prostate cancer? a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Le Ma, Yaxin Hao, Luoping Zhai, Wanchun Zhang, Xiaoming Cao, Kaiyuan Jia","doi":"10.1186/s12880-025-01557-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>PSMA PET/CT emerges as a pivotal technology in the diagnostic landscape of prostate cancer (PCa). It offers a suite of imaging interpretation criteria, notably the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), the molecular imaging prostate-specific membrane antigen score (miPSMA score), and the PSMA reporting and data system (PSMA-RADS). Identifying the most valuable criteria for diagnosing PCa and standardizing imaging interpretation across various tracers is an unresolved question. Our study endeavors to pinpoint the most optimal criteria to enhance the precision of PCa diagnosis, encompassing clinically significant PCa (csPCa), by evaluating the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of these three criteria using two [<sup>18</sup>F]-labeled PSMA tracers.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective analysis spans a five-year period, focusing on patients with clinically suspected or newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve PCa who underwent <sup>18</sup>F-PSMA PET/CT. The study is bifurcated into two segments: 1.A direct comparison assessing the consistency in SUVmax, miPSMA scores, and PSMA-RADS among PSMA PET/CT tracers ([<sup>18</sup>F]DCFPyL and [<sup>18</sup>F]PSMA-1007) for prostate foci in 24 patients. 2. An analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of these three criteria for both PCa and csPCa across 55 [<sup>18</sup>F]DCFPyL and 65 [<sup>18</sup>F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1.Our head-to-head study reveals that SUVmax and miPSMA score exhibit near-perfect consistency, with PSMA-RADS demonstrating substantial consistency. 2. The diagnostic accuracy ranking, considering both PCa and csPCa, stands as miPSMA score ≈ SUVmax > PSMA-RADS for [<sup>18</sup>F]DCFPyL PET/CT, contrasting with miPSMA score > SUVmax ≈ PSMA-RADS for [<sup>18</sup>F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The miPSMA score outperforms SUVmax and PSMA-RADS in terms of inter-tracer consistency and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of PCa, including csPCa, when comparing [<sup>18</sup>F]DCFPyL and [<sup>18</sup>F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans. This underscores the miPSMA score's potential as a robust criterion for PCa and csPCa diagnosis, holding substantial promise for refining clinical decision-making and patient management strategies.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9020,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Imaging","volume":"25 1","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749428/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-025-01557-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: PSMA PET/CT emerges as a pivotal technology in the diagnostic landscape of prostate cancer (PCa). It offers a suite of imaging interpretation criteria, notably the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), the molecular imaging prostate-specific membrane antigen score (miPSMA score), and the PSMA reporting and data system (PSMA-RADS). Identifying the most valuable criteria for diagnosing PCa and standardizing imaging interpretation across various tracers is an unresolved question. Our study endeavors to pinpoint the most optimal criteria to enhance the precision of PCa diagnosis, encompassing clinically significant PCa (csPCa), by evaluating the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of these three criteria using two [18F]-labeled PSMA tracers.

Method: This retrospective analysis spans a five-year period, focusing on patients with clinically suspected or newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve PCa who underwent 18F-PSMA PET/CT. The study is bifurcated into two segments: 1.A direct comparison assessing the consistency in SUVmax, miPSMA scores, and PSMA-RADS among PSMA PET/CT tracers ([18F]DCFPyL and [18F]PSMA-1007) for prostate foci in 24 patients. 2. An analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of these three criteria for both PCa and csPCa across 55 [18F]DCFPyL and 65 [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans, respectively.

Results: 1.Our head-to-head study reveals that SUVmax and miPSMA score exhibit near-perfect consistency, with PSMA-RADS demonstrating substantial consistency. 2. The diagnostic accuracy ranking, considering both PCa and csPCa, stands as miPSMA score ≈ SUVmax > PSMA-RADS for [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT, contrasting with miPSMA score > SUVmax ≈ PSMA-RADS for [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT.

Conclusion: The miPSMA score outperforms SUVmax and PSMA-RADS in terms of inter-tracer consistency and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of PCa, including csPCa, when comparing [18F]DCFPyL and [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans. This underscores the miPSMA score's potential as a robust criterion for PCa and csPCa diagnosis, holding substantial promise for refining clinical decision-making and patient management strategies.

Clinical trial number: not applicable.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
哪种PSMA PET/CT判读标准最有效诊断前列腺癌?回顾性队列研究。
背景:PSMA PET/CT成为前列腺癌诊断领域的关键技术。它提供了一套成像解释标准,特别是最大标准化摄取值(SUVmax),前列腺特异性膜抗原分子成像评分(miPSMA评分)和PSMA报告和数据系统(PSMA- rads)。确定诊断PCa的最有价值的标准和标准化各种示踪剂的成像解释是一个未解决的问题。我们的研究试图通过使用两种[18F]标记的PSMA示踪剂评估这三个标准的一致性和诊断准确性,从而确定提高PCa诊断精度的最优标准,包括临床显著性PCa (csPCa)。方法:回顾性分析为期5年,重点关注临床疑似或新诊断的treatment-naïve PCa患者,并接受18F-PSMA PET/CT检查。本研究分为两个部分:1。对24例前列腺病灶的PSMA PET/CT示踪剂([18F]DCFPyL和[18F]PSMA-1007)的SUVmax、miPSMA评分和PSMA- rads的一致性进行直接比较。2. 分析这三个标准在55例[18F]DCFPyL和65例[18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT扫描中对PCa和csPCa的诊断准确性。结果:1。我们的对比研究表明,SUVmax和miPSMA得分表现出近乎完美的一致性,PSMA-RADS表现出实质性的一致性。2. 考虑PCa和csPCa的诊断准确性排名为[18F]DCFPyL PET/CT的miPSMA评分≈SUVmax > pma - rads,与[18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT的miPSMA评分> SUVmax≈pma - rads形成对比。结论:当比较[18F]DCFPyL和[18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT扫描时,miPSMA评分在检测PCa(包括csPCa)的示踪物一致性和诊断准确性方面优于SUVmax和PSMA-RADS。这强调了miPSMA评分作为PCa和csPCa诊断的可靠标准的潜力,在改进临床决策和患者管理策略方面有着巨大的希望。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Imaging
BMC Medical Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
198
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Imaging is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the development, evaluation, and use of imaging techniques and image processing tools to diagnose and manage disease.
期刊最新文献
Computed tomography enterography-based radiomics nomograms to predict inflammatory activity for ileocolonic Crohn's disease: a preliminary single-center retrospective study. A deep learning approach for early prediction of breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy response on multistage bimodal ultrasound images. Clinical study of colorViz fusion image vascular grading based on multi-phase CTA reconstruction in acute ischemic stroke. Association between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and progression of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a multicenter study. Which PSMA PET/CT interpretation criteria most effectively diagnose prostate cancer? a retrospective cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1