The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients
Background: Inconclusive bone scans are a challenge but there is no consensus about follow-up imaging. We evaluated the use of <sup>68</sup>gallium-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen (<sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA) PET/CT if <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (<sup...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2020-05-01
|
| Series: | Diagnostics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/10/6/352 |
| _version_ | 1797566766069579776 |
|---|---|
| author | Claus Madsen Peter Østergren Christian Haarmark |
| author_facet | Claus Madsen Peter Østergren Christian Haarmark |
| author_sort | Claus Madsen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Inconclusive bone scans are a challenge but there is no consensus about follow-up imaging. We evaluated the use of <sup>68</sup>gallium-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen (<sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA) PET/CT if <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (<sup>18</sup>F-NaF) PET/CT was inconclusive. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with no previously known bone metastases who had one or more equivocal bone lesions on <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT and underwent additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT. The bone lesions were deemed as true metastases or not based on follow-up by surveying supplemental imaging modalities and hospital records. A subgroup of patients with “most valid follow-up” was created, which included patients with unmeasurable PSA after prostatectomy or subsequent imaging (additional <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT, <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT, CT, or MRI). Results: Of the 2918 patients referred for <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT from the department of urology in the inclusion period, 51 (1.7%) were inconclusive regarding bone metastases and underwent additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT. Thirteen of these patients (25%) were ultimately diagnosed with bone metastases. Patient-based sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT were 100%, 95%, and 96%, respectively. In patients with “most valid follow-up”, the same parameters were 100%, 93%, and 94%, respectively. Conclusion: <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT is an excellent complementary modality in when <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT is equivocal. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T19:31:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e37b7bfc73244d6ab8b717d9c307e6e9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-4418 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T19:31:51Z |
| publishDate | 2020-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Diagnostics |
| spelling | doaj.art-e37b7bfc73244d6ab8b717d9c307e6e92023-11-20T02:05:16ZengMDPI AGDiagnostics2075-44182020-05-0110635210.3390/diagnostics10060352The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer PatientsClaus Madsen0Peter Østergren1Christian Haarmark2Department of Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, DK-2730 Herlev, DenmarkDepartment of Urology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 1, DK-2730 Herlev, DenmarkDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, DK-2730 Herlev, DenmarkBackground: Inconclusive bone scans are a challenge but there is no consensus about follow-up imaging. We evaluated the use of <sup>68</sup>gallium-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen (<sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA) PET/CT if <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (<sup>18</sup>F-NaF) PET/CT was inconclusive. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with no previously known bone metastases who had one or more equivocal bone lesions on <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT and underwent additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT. The bone lesions were deemed as true metastases or not based on follow-up by surveying supplemental imaging modalities and hospital records. A subgroup of patients with “most valid follow-up” was created, which included patients with unmeasurable PSA after prostatectomy or subsequent imaging (additional <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT, <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT, CT, or MRI). Results: Of the 2918 patients referred for <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT from the department of urology in the inclusion period, 51 (1.7%) were inconclusive regarding bone metastases and underwent additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT. Thirteen of these patients (25%) were ultimately diagnosed with bone metastases. Patient-based sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of additional <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT were 100%, 95%, and 96%, respectively. In patients with “most valid follow-up”, the same parameters were 100%, 93%, and 94%, respectively. Conclusion: <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT is an excellent complementary modality in when <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT is equivocal.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/10/6/352PSMA PET/CTNaF PET/CTprostate cancer, bone metastases |
| spellingShingle | Claus Madsen Peter Østergren Christian Haarmark The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients Diagnostics PSMA PET/CT NaF PET/CT prostate cancer, bone metastases |
| title | The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients |
| title_full | The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients |
| title_fullStr | The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients |
| title_short | The Value of <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT Following Equivocal <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients |
| title_sort | value of sup 68 sup ga psma pet ct following equivocal sup 18 sup f naf pet ct in prostate cancer patients |
| topic | PSMA PET/CT NaF PET/CT prostate cancer, bone metastases |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/10/6/352 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT clausmadsen thevalueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients AT peterøstergren thevalueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients AT christianhaarmark thevalueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients AT clausmadsen valueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients AT peterøstergren valueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients AT christianhaarmark valueofsup68supgapsmapetctfollowingequivocalsup18supfnafpetctinprostatecancerpatients |