21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR): International Consensus -based Guidelines on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Recurrence after Radiation Therapy and Radical Prostatectomy

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d5493973e306">Imaging techniques are used to identify local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) for salvage therapy and to exclude metastases that should be addressed with systemic therapy. For magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a reduction in the variability of acquisition, interpretation, and reporting is required to detect local PCa recurrence in men with biochemical relapse after local treatment with curative intent. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2

          The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) was developed with a consensus-based process using a combination of published data, and expert observations and opinions. In the short time since its release, numerous studies have validated the value of PI-RADS v2 but, as expected, have also identified a number of ambiguities and limitations, some of which have been documented in the literature with potential solutions offered. To address these issues, the PI-RADS Steering Committee, again using a consensus-based process, has recommended several modifications to PI-RADS v2, maintaining the framework of assigning scores to individual sequences and using these scores to derive an overall assessment category. This updated version, described in this article, is termed PI-RADS v2.1. It is anticipated that the adoption of these PI-RADS v2.1 modifications will improve inter-reader variability and simplify PI-RADS assessment of prostate magnetic resonance imaging even further. Research on the value and limitations on all components of PI-RADS v2.1 is strongly encouraged.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Diagnosis and Treatment of Prostate Cancer: A Review.

            Prostate cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis made in men with more than 160 000 new cases each year in the United States. Although it often has an indolent course, prostate cancer remains the third-leading cause of cancer death in men.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial

              National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider 18 F-fluciclovine PET-CT for prostate cancer biochemical recurrence localisation after radical prostatectomy, whereas European Association of Urology guidelines recommend prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET-CT. To the best of our knowledge, no prospective head-to-head comparison between these tests has been done so far. The aim of this study was to compare prospectively paired 18 F-fluciclovine and PSMA PET-CT scans for localising biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy in patients with low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations (<2·0 ng/mL). This was a prospective, single-centre, open-label, single-arm comparative study done at University of California Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA, USA). Patients older than 18 years of age with prostate cancer biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and PSA levels ranging from 0·2 to 2·0 ng/mL without any prior salvage therapy and with a Karnofsky performance status of at least 50 were eligible. Patients underwent 18 F-fluciclovine (reference test) and PSMA (index test) PET-CT scans within 15 days. Detection rate of biochemical recurrence at the patient level and by anatomical region was the primary endpoint. A statistical power analysis demonstrated that a sample size of 50 patients was needed to show a 22% difference in detection rates in favour of PSMA (test for superiority). Each PET scan was interpreted by three independent masked readers and a consensus majority interpretation was generated (two vs one) to determine positive findings. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT03515577 , and is complete. Between Feb 26, 2018, and Sept 20, 2018, 143 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 50 patients were enrolled into the study. Median follow-up was 8 months (IQR 7–9). The primary endpoint was met; detection rates were significantly lower with 18 F-fluciclovine PET-CT (13 [26%; 95% CI 15–40] of 50) than with PSMA PET-CT (28 [56%; 41–70] of 50), with an odds ratio (OR) of 4·8 (95% CI 1·6–19·2; p=0·0026) at the patient level; in the subanalysis of the pelvic nodes region (four [8%; 2–19] with 18 F-fluciclovine vs 15 [30%; 18–45] with PSMA PET-CT; OR 12·0 [1·8–513·0], p=0·0034); and in the subanalysis of any extrapelvic lesions (none [0%; 0–6] vs eight [16%; 7–29]; OR non-estimable [95% CI non-estimable], p=0·0078). With higher detection rates, PSMA should be the PET tracer of choice when PET-CT imaging is considered for subsequent treatment management decisions in patients with prostate cancer and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and low PSA concentrations (≤2·0 ng/mL). Further research is needed to investigate whether higher detection rates translate into improved oncological outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                European Urology Oncology
                European Urology Oncology
                Elsevier BV
                25889311
                December 2021
                December 2021
                : 4
                : 6
                : 868-876
                Article
                10.1016/j.euo.2021.01.003
                33582104
                8ecca56b-40fc-4caf-9afc-16ec96ef7b8a
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article