scholarly journals 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: Influence of dual-time and PMT- vs SiPM-based detectors

2022 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 101293
Author(s):  
Heying Duan ◽  
Lucia Baratto ◽  
Negin Hatami ◽  
Tie Liang ◽  
Carina Mari Aparici ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
V Fech ◽  
C Sachpekidis ◽  
I Alberts ◽  
L Dijkstra ◽  
J von Hinten ◽  
...  

Urology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie Michael ◽  
Amir H. Khandani ◽  
Ramsankar Basak ◽  
Hung-Jui Tan ◽  
Trevor J. Royce ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ian Alberts ◽  
Jan-Niklas Hünermund ◽  
Christos Sachpekidis ◽  
Clemens Mingels ◽  
Viktor Fech ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To investigate the impact of digital PET/CT on diagnostic certainty, patient-based sensitivity and interrater reliability. Methods Four physicians retrospectively evaluated two matched cohorts of patients undergoing [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT on a digital (dPET/CT n = 65) or an analogue scanner (aPET/CT n = 65) for recurrent prostate cancer between 11/2018 and 03/2019. The number of equivocal and pathological lesions as well as the frequency of discrepant findings and the interrater reliability for the two scanners were compared. Results dPET/CT detected more lesions than aPET/CT (p < 0.001). A higher number of pathological scans were observed for dPET/CT (83% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). The true-positive rate at follow-up was 100% for dPET/CT compared to 84% for aPET/CT (p < 0.001). The proportion of lesions rated as non-pathological as a total of all PSMA-avid lesions detected for dPET/CT was comparable to aPET/CT (61.8% vs. 57.0%, p = 0.99). Neither a higher rate of diagnostically uncertain lesions (11.5% dPET/CT vs. 13.7% aPET/CT, p = 0.95) nor discrepant scans (where one or more readers differed in opinion as to whether the scan is pathological) were observed (18% dPET/CT vs. 17% aPET/CT, p = 0.76). Interrater reliability for pathological lesions was excellent for both scanner types (Cronbach’s α = 0.923 dPET/CT; α = 0.948 aPET/CT) and interrater agreement was substantial for dPET/CT (Krippendorf’s α = 0.701) and almost perfect in aPET/CT (α = 0.802). Conclusions A higher detection rate for pathological lesions for dPET/CT compared with aPET/CT in multiple readers was observed. This improved sensitivity was coupled with an improved true-positive rate and was not associated with increased diagnostic uncertainty, rate of non-specific lesions, or reduced interrater reliability. Key Points • New generation digital scanners detect more cancer lesions in men with prostate cancer. • When using digital scanners, the doctors are able to diagnose prostate cancer lesions with better certainty • When using digital scanners, the doctors do not disagree with each other more than with other scanner types.


2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-216
Author(s):  
Bernard H.E. Jansen ◽  
Robin W. Jansen ◽  
Maurits Wondergem ◽  
Sandra Srbljin ◽  
John M.H. de Klerk ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Soldatov ◽  
Christoph A.J. von Klot ◽  
Daniel Walacides ◽  
Thorsten Derlin ◽  
Frank M. Bengel ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document