The value of intravenous contrast medium in PSMA PET/CT imaging in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer
- 14 June 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Nuclear Medicine Communications
- Vol. 42 (11), 1239-1246
- https://doi.org/10.1097/mnm.0000000000001453
Abstract
Purpose To investigate the added value of diagnostic abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography (ceCT) in Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR). Methods Eighty-two consecutive patients (median age, 69 years; range, 45–86 years) with BCR underwent Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT with low-dose nonenhanced (ne) whole-body CT and diagnostic ceCT. Imaging results were retrospectively reviewed by two readers (R1, R2) for diagnostic certainty, local recurrence, lymph node metastasis (LNM) and bone metastasis. Interobserver agreement was assessed. Histopathology served as reference standard in 7, imaging and clinical follow-up in 65 and clinical follow-up alone in 10 patients. Results Certain local recurrence, LNM and bone metastasis diagnoses increased substantially from ceCT (R1: 5%/18%/32%; R2: 37%/50%/82%) to nePET/CT (R1: 78%/87%/93%; R2: 81%/87%/95%) for both readers, but the difference between nePET/CT and cePET/CT (R1: 77%/96%/92%; R2: 89%/94%/96%) was marginal. Interobserver agreement was minimal with ceCT (Krippendorff’s alpha: 0.04–0.26), substantial with nePET/CT (0.60–0.86) and best with cePET/CT (0.76–0.86). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) for local recurrence for R1/R2 were 0.60/0.65 for ceCT, 0.81/0.79 for nePET/CT and 0.81/0.82 for cePET/CT. AUCs for LNMs for R1/R2 were 0.67/0.77 for ceCT, 0.91/0.82 for nePET/CT and 0.92/0.87 for cePET/CT. AUCs for BMs for R1/R2 were 0.60/0.53 for ceCT, 0.93/0.84 for nePET/CT and 0.93/0.86 for cePET/CT. Conclusion Diagnostic abdominal ceCT increases the diagnostic certainty and interobserver agreement in Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT in BCR of prostate cancer. The diagnostic performance of cePET/CT is significantly better than ceCT alone but not nePET/CT.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Contrast‐enhanced 18F‐FDG‐PET/CT for the assessment of necrotic lymph node metastasesHead & Neck, 2011
- Is contrast material needed after treatment of malignant lymphoma in positron emission tomography/computed tomography?Annals of Nuclear Medicine, 2010
- Performance of Integrated FDG-PET/Contrast-enhanced CT in the Diagnosis of Recurrent Pancreatic Cancer: Comparison with Integrated FDG-PET/Non-contrast-enhanced CT and Enhanced CTMolecular Imaging & Biology, 2009
- Performance of integrated FDG PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: Comparison with integrated FDG PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CTEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 2009
- Contrast-Enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT: 1-Stop-Shop Imaging for Assessing the Resectability of Pancreatic CancerJournal of Nuclear Medicine, 2008
- Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 2008
- A nomogram predicting long‐term biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomyCancer, 2008
- CANCER PROGRESSION AND SURVIVAL RATES FOLLOWING ANATOMICAL RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY IN 3,478 CONSECUTIVE PATIENTS: LONG-TERM RESULTSJournal of Urology, 2004
- Management of recurrent disease after radical prostatectomyProstate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, 2004
- LONG-TERM BIOCHEMICAL DISEASE-FREE AND CANCER-SPECIFIC SURVIVAL FOLLOWING ANATOMIC RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMYUrologic Clinics of North America, 2001