Comparing the Diagnostic Performance of Multiparametric Prostate MRI Versus 68Ga-PSMA PET-CT in the Evaluation Lymph Node Involvement and Extraprostatic Extension

Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA PET and mpMRI for prostate cancer local staging: a comprehensive review and direct meta-analysis

Purpose

This meta-analysis is conducted to evaluate the comparative diagnostic efficacy of 68Ga-PSMA PET vs. mpMRI in detecting local staging of prostate cancer(PCa).

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify publications up to February 2024. The analysis included studies that evaluated the direct comparison of 68Ga-PSMA PET and mpMRI for local staging of prostate cancer. The reliability of the analyzed studies was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Results

The meta-analysis included 10 articles involving 505 patients, which revealed that both 68Ga-PSMA PET and mpMRI had similar sensitivities and specificities in detecting extracapsular extension(ECE) and seminal vesicle invasion(SVI). The sensitivities for ECE were 0.56 (95% CI: 0.41-0.71) for 68Ga-PSMA PET and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.43-0.71) for mpMRI, and specificities were both 0.84 (68Ga-PSMA PET 95% CI: 0.75-0.91, mpMRI 95% CI: 0.76-0.91).For SVI, sensitivities were 0.57 (95% CI: 0.46-0.68) for 68Ga-PSMA PET and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.60-0.80) for mpMRI, with specificities of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86-0.96) for 68Ga-PSMA PET and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89-0.98) for mpMRI. There were no notable variations in sensitivity or specificity between the two methods for detecting ECE and SVI (P = 0.89 and 0.93 for ECE, 0.09 and 0.57 for SVI).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicates that 68Ga-PSMA PET has similar sensitivity and specificity to mpMRI in local prostate cancer staging. Nevertheless, the limited study sample size calls for further, larger prospective studies to validate these findings.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=522438, identifier CRD42024522438.

Assessing ChatGPT's summarization of 68Ga PSMA PET/CT reports for patients

PURPOSE

ChatGPT has recently been the subject of many studies, and its responses to medical questions have been successful. We examined ChatGPT-4's evaluation of structured 68Ga prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT reports of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients.

METHODS

68Ga PSMA PET/CT reports of 164 patients were entered to ChatGPT-4. ChatGPT-4 was asked to respond the following questions according to the PET/CT reports: 1-Has the cancer in the prostate extended to organs adjacent to the prostate? 2-Has the cancer in the prostate spread to neighboring lymph nodes? 3-Has the cancer in the prostate spread to lymph nodes in distant areas? 4-Has the cancer in the prostate spread to the bones? 5-Has the cancer in the prostate spread to other organs? ChatGPT-4's responses were scored on a Likert-type scale for clarity and accuracy.

RESULTS

The mean scores for clarity were 4.93 ± 0.32, 4.95 ± 0.25, 4.96 ± 0.19, 4.99 ± 0.11, and 4.96 ± 0.30, respectively. The mean scores for accuracy were 4.87 ∓ 0.61, 4.87 ∓ 0.62, 4.79 ± 0.83, 4.96 ± 0.25, and 4.93 ± 0.45, respectively. Patients with distant lymphatic metastases had a lower mean accuracy score than those without (4.28 ± 1.45 vs. 4.94 ± 0.39; p < 0.001). ChatGPT-4's responses in 13 patients (8%) had the potential for harmful information.

CONCLUSION

ChatGPT-4 successfully interprets structured 68Ga PSMA PET/CT reports of reports of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. However, it is unlikely that ChatGPT-4 evaluations will replace physicians' evaluations today, especially since it can produce fabricated information.

Comparison between Three Radiomics Models and Clinical Nomograms for Prediction of Lymph Node Involvement in PCa Patients Combining Clinical and Radiomic Features

PURPOSE

We aim to compare the performance of three different radiomics models (logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM)) and clinical nomograms (Briganti, MSKCC, Yale, and Roach) for predicting lymph node involvement (LNI) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The retrospective study includes 95 patients who underwent mp-MRI and radical prostatectomy for PCa with pelvic lymphadenectomy. Imaging data (intensity in T2, DWI, ADC, and PIRADS), clinical data (age and pre-MRI PSA), histological data (Gleason score, TNM staging, histological type, capsule invasion, seminal vesicle invasion, and neurovascular bundle involvement), and clinical nomograms (Yale, Roach, MSKCC, and Briganti) were collected for each patient. Manual segmentation of the index lesions was performed for each patient using an open-source program (3D SLICER). Radiomic features were extracted for each segmentation using the Pyradiomics library for each sequence (T2, DWI, and ADC). The features were then selected and used to train and test three different radiomics models (LR, RF, and SVM) independently using ChatGPT software (v 4o). The coefficient value of each feature was calculated (significant value for coefficient ≥ ±0.5). The predictive performance of the radiomics models and clinical nomograms was assessed using accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) (significant value for p ≤ 0.05). Thus, the diagnostic accuracy between the radiomics and clinical models were compared.

RESULTS

This study identified 343 features per patient (330 radiomics features and 13 clinical features). The most significant features were T2_nodulofirstordervariance and T2_nodulofirstorderkurtosis. The highest predictive performance was achieved by the RF model with DWI (accuracy 86%, AUC 0.89) and ADC (accuracy 89%, AUC 0.67). Clinical nomograms demonstrated satisfactory but lower predictive performance compared to the RF model in the DWI sequences.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the prediction models developed using integrated data (radiomics and semantics), RF shows slightly higher diagnostic accuracy in terms of AUC compared to clinical nomograms in PCa lymph node involvement prediction.

Intraoperative technologies to assess margin status during radical prostatectomy - a narrative review

Positive surgical margin (PSM) is a frequent concern for surgeons performing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa). PSM are recognized as risk factors for earlier biochemical recurrence and expose patients to adjuvant or salvage treatments such as external radiotherapy and hormonotherapy. Several strategies have been established to reduce PSM rate, while still allowing safe nerve-sparing surgery. Precise preoperative staging by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and fusion biopsy is recommended to identify suspicious areas of extracapsular extension (ECE) that warrant special attention during dissection. However, even with optimal imaging, ECE can be missed, some cancers are not well defined or visible, and capsular incision during surgery remains an issue. Hence, intraoperative frozen section techniques, such as the neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen section examination (NeuroSAFE) have been developed and lately widely disseminated. The NeuroSAFE technique reduces PSM rate while allowing higher rate of nerve-sparing surgery. However, its use is limited to high volume or expert center because of its high barrier-to-entry in terms of logistics, human resources and expertise, as well as cost. Also, NeuroSAFE is a time-consuming process, even in expert hands. To address these issues, several technologies have been developed for an ex vivo and in vivo use. Ex vivo technology such as fluorescent confocal microscopy and intraoperative PET-CT require the extraction of the specimen for preparation, and digital images acquisition. In vivo technology, such as augmented reality based on mpMRI images and PSMA-fluorescent guided surgery have the advantage to provide an intracorporeal analysis of the completeness of the resection. The current manuscript provides a narrative review of established techniques, and details several new and promising techniques for intraoperative PSM assessment.

68Ga-PSMA-11 PET and mpMRI in the diagnosis of initial lymph node staging of prostate cancer: a head-to-head comparative meta-analysis

Purpose

This meta-analysis evaluates the comparative diagnostic efficacy of 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen-11 PET (68Ga-PSMA-11 PET) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for the initial lymph node staging of prostate cancer.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Embase databases through October 2023 for studies that provide a head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET and mpMRI, using pelvic lymph node dissection as the gold standard. We assessed sensitivity and specificity using the DerSimonian and Laird method, with variance stabilization via the Freeman-Tukey double inverse sine transformation. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies (QUADAS-2) tool.

Results

The meta-analysis incorporated 13 articles, involving a total of 1,527 patients. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.51-0.91) and a specificity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88-0.99). In comparison, mpMRI showed a sensitivity of 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.68) and a specificity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88-0.99). Although 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET appeared to be more sensitive than mpMRI, the differences in sensitivity (p = 0.11) and specificity (p = 0.47) were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET and mpMRI exhibit similar sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of initial lymph node staging of prostate cancer. However, given that most included studies were retrospective, further prospective studies with larger sample sizes are essential to validate these results.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO code is CRD42023495266.

Head-to-head comparison of prostate-specific membrane antigen PET and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of pretreatment patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in the diagnosis of pretreatment prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies published before June 22, 2022. We assessed risk of bias and applicability by using QUADAS-2 tool. Data synthesis was performed with Stata 17.0 software, using the "midas" and "meqrlogit" packages.

RESULTS

We included 29 articles focusing on primary cancer detection, 18 articles about primary staging, and two articles containing them both. For PSMA PET versus mpMRI in primary PCa detection, sensitivities and specificities in the per-patient analysis were 0.90 and 0.84 (p<0.0001), and 0.66 and 0.60 (p <0.0001), and in the per-lesion analysis they were 0.79 and 0.78 (p <0.0001), and 0.84 and 0.82 (p <0.0001). For the per-patient analysis of PSMA PET versus mpMRI in primary staging, sensitivities and specificities in extracapsular extension detection were 0.59 and 0.66 (p =0.005), and 0.79 and 0.76 (p =0.0074), and in seminal vesicle infiltration (SVI) detection they were 0.51 and 0.60 (p =0.0008), and 0.93 and 0.96 (p =0.0092). For PSMA PET versus mpMRI in lymph node metastasis (LNM) detection, sensitivities and specificities in the per-patient analysis were 0.68 and 0.46 (p <0.0001), and 0.91 and 0.90 (p =0.81), and in the per-lesion analysis they were 0.67 and 0.36 (p <0.0001), and 0.99 and 0.99 (p =0.18).

CONCLUSION

PSMA PET has higher diagnostic value than mpMRI in the detection of primary PCa. Regarding the primary staging, mpMRI has potential advantages in SVI detection, while PSMA PET has relative advantages in LNM detection.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The integration of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET into the diagnostic pathway may be helpful for improving the accuracy of prostate cancer detection. However, further studies are needed to address the cost implications and evaluate its utility in specific patient populations or clinical scenarios. Moreover, we recommend the combination of PSMA PET and mpMRI for cancer staging.

KEY POINTS

• Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET has higher sensitivity and specificity for primary tumor detection in prostate cancer compared to multiparametric MRI. • Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET also has significantly better sensitivity and specificity for lymph node metastases of prostate cancer compared to multiparametric MRI. • Multiparametric MRI has better accuracy for extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle infiltration compared to ate-specific membrane antigen PET.

An elusive prostate tumour: Metastatic microcystic cribriform carcinoma presenting with imaging-histologic discordance

Microcystic adenocarcinoma is an uncommon histologic variant of prostate carcinoma. Despite its rarity, it has gained increasing recognition over the past decade for its diagnostic challenges and unclear prognostic significance. Herein, we describe a rare case of metastatic microcystic prostate adenocarcinoma, presenting with discordance between imaging and histologic findings. This report highlights the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of this pathological entity and the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration in the management of intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Multimodal radiomics based on 18F-Prostate-specific membrane antigen-1007 PET/CT and multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer extracapsular extension prediction

OBJECTIVES

To compare the performance of the multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) radiomics and 18F-Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-1007 PET/CT radiomics model in diagnosing extracapsular extension (EPE) in prostate cancer (PCa), and to evaluate the performance of a multimodal radiomics model combining mpMRI and PET/CT in predicting EPE.

METHODS

We included 197 patients with PCa who underwent preoperative mpMRI and PET/CT before surgery. mpMRI and PET/CT images were segmented to delineate the regions of interest and extract radiomics features. PET/CT, mpMRI, and multimodal radiomics models were constructed based on maximum correlation, minimum redundancy, and logistic regression analyses. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and indices derived from the confusion matrix.

RESULTS

AUC values for the mpMRI, PET/CT, and multimodal radiomics models were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.90), 0.73 (0.64-0.80), and 0.83 (0.75-0.89), respectively, in the training cohort and 0.74 (0.61-0.85), 0.62 (0.48-0.74), and 0.77 (0.64-0.87), respectively, in the testing cohort. The net reclassification improvement demonstrated that the mpMRI radiomics model outperformed the PET/CT one in predicting EPE, with better clinical benefits. The multimodal radiomics model performed better than the single PET/CT radiomics model (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The mpMRI and 18F-PSMA-PET/CT combination enhanced the predictive power of EPE in patients with PCa. The multimodal radiomics model will become a reliable and robust tool to assist urologists and radiologists in making preoperative decisions.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study presents the first application of multimodal radiomics based on PET/CT and MRI for predicting EPE.

Detection Rate of PSMA PET Using Different Ligands in Men with Biochemical Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Radical Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

Despite the acknowledged diagnostic detection rate of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in prostate cancer, little is known about the quality of evidence, particularly focusing on prospective studies. Most systematic reviews are based on retrospective reports.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To conduct systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies reporting the diagnostic detection rate of PSMA PET (computed tomography (CT) and MR) for the detection of biochemically recurrent metastatic prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus, from database until March 1, 2023 for randomized controlled trials and prospective studies using PSMA PET imaging in prostate cancer. The primary endpoint was to assess diagnostic detection rate of PSMA PET imaging in the detection of recurrent prostate cancer in men with biochemical relapse following radical treatment. We calculated the pooled overall diagnostic detection rate with 95% CI using a random-effects model and assessed the heterogeneity between the studies including risk of biases estimation.

RESULTS

A total of 6800 patients from 32 articles were included in this study. The overall detection rate of PSMA PET for prostate cancer was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.63, 0.71). For histologically confirmed lymph nodes, the PPV from 13 prospective studies containing 1496 patients was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93, 0.99). We performed a subgroup analysis of PSMA PET detection rates according to categorically grouped Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) values of 0-0.5, 0.5-1.0, 1.0-2.0, and >2.0 ng/ml and obtained detection rates of 0.44, 0.63, 0.82, and 0.94, respectively. The detection rate of 18F PSMA was better in men with a PSA between 1 ng/ml and 2 ng/ml in comparison to 68Ga PSMA (0.91 with 95% CI 0.81-0.99 vs. 0.79 with 95% CI 0.73, 0.85).

CONCLUSION

PSMA PET imaging provides a good detection rate for the metastatic recurrence of prostate cancer in men with biochemical relapse following radical treatment. The detection rate improves significantly above a serum PSA value of 1 ng/ml. The diagnostic detection rate of 18F-PSMA is best at PSA values between 1 and 2 ng/ml, in comparison to 68Ga PSMA. This conclusion is heavily biased, further research needs to focus on better methodology to minimize the risk of biases.

Head-to-head Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography and Conventional Imaging Modalities for Initial Staging of Intermediate- to High-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Whether prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) should replace conventional imaging modalities (CIM) for initial staging of intermediate-high risk prostate cancer (PCa) requires definitive evidence on their relative diagnostic abilities.

OBJECTIVE

To perform head-to-head comparisons of PSMA-PET and CIM including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), computed tomography (CT) and bone scan (BS) for upfront staging of tumour, nodal, and bone metastasis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search of the PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Scopus databases was conducted from inception to December 2021. Only studies in which patients underwent both PSMA-PET and CIM and imaging was referenced against histopathology or composite reference standards were included. Quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) checklist and its extension for comparative reviews (QUADAS-C). Pairwise comparisons of the sensitivity and specificity of PSMA-PET versus CIM were performed by adding imaging modality as a covariate to bivariate mixed-effects meta-regression models. The likelihood ratio test was applied to determine whether statistically significant differences existed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 31 studies (2431 patients) were included. PSMA-PET/MRI was more sensitive than mpMRI for detection of extra-prostatic extension (78.7% versus 52.9%) and seminal vesicle invasion (66.7% versus 51.0%). For nodal staging, PSMA-PET was more sensitive and specific than mpMRI (73.7% versus 38.9%, 97.5% versus 82.6%) and CT (73.2% versus 38.5%, 97.8% versus 83.6%). For bone metastasis staging, PSMA-PET was more sensitive and specific than BS with or without single-photon emission computerised tomography (98.0% versus 73.0%, 96.2% versus 79.1%). A time interval between imaging modalities >1 month was identified as a source of heterogeneity across all nodal staging analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct comparisons revealed that PSMA-PET significantly outperforms CIM, which suggests that PSMA-PET should be used as a first-line approach for the initial staging of PCa.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed direct comparisons of the ability of a scan method called PSMA-PET (prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography) and current imaging methods to detect the spread of prostate cancer outside the prostate gland. We found that PSMA-PET is more accurate for detection of the spread of prostate cancer to adjacent tissue, nearby lymph nodes, and bones.

Comparing the Detection Performance Between Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET/CT in Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has been promoted as an auxiliary diagnostic tool for prostate biopsy. However, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) including 68 Ga-PSMA-11, 18 F-DCFPyL, and 18 F-PSMA-1007 applied PET/CT imaging was an emerging diagnostic tool in prostate cancer patients for staging or posttreatment follow-up, even early detecting. Many studies have used PSMA PET for comparison with mpMRI to test the diagnostic ability for early prostate cancer. Unfortunately, these studies have shown conflicting results. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the differences in diagnostic performance between PSMA PET and mpMRI for detecting and T staging localized prostatic tumors.

METHODS

This meta-analysis involved a systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases. The pooling sensitivity and specificity of PSMA and mpMRI verified by pathological analysis were calculated and used to compare the differences between the 2 imaging tools.

RESULTS

Overall, 39 studies were included (3630 patients in total) from 2016 to 2022 in the current meta-analysis and found that the pooling sensitivity values for localized prostatic tumors and T staging T3a and T3b of PSMA PET were 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.86), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.39-0.79), and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76), respectively, whereas those of mpMRI were found to be 0.84 (95% 0.78-0.89), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.52-0.80), and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.45-0.73), respectively, without significant differences ( P > 0.05). However, in a subgroup analysis of radiotracer, the pooling sensitivity of 18 F-DCFPyL PET was higher than mpMRI (relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found that whereas 18 F-DCFPyL PET was superior to mpMRI at detecting localized prostatic tumors, the detection performance of PSMA PET for localized prostatic tumors and T staging was comparable to that of mpMRI.

The Use of MRI-Derived Radiomic Models in Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification: A Critical Review of Contemporary Literature

The development of precise medical imaging has facilitated the establishment of radiomics, a computer-based method of quantitatively analyzing subvisual imaging characteristics. The present review summarizes the current literature on the use of diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived radiomics in prostate cancer (PCa) risk stratification. A stepwise literature search of publications from 2017 to 2022 was performed. Of 218 articles on MRI-derived prostate radiomics, 33 (15.1%) generated models for PCa risk stratification. Prediction of Gleason score (GS), adverse pathology, postsurgical recurrence, and postradiation failure were the primary endpoints in 15 (45.5%), 11 (33.3%), 4 (12.1%), and 3 (9.1%) studies. In predicting GS and adverse pathology, radiomic models differentiated well, with receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (ROC-AUC) values of 0.50–0.92 and 0.60–0.92, respectively. For studies predicting post-treatment recurrence or failure, ROC-AUC for radiomic models ranged from 0.73 to 0.99 in postsurgical and radiation cohorts. Finally, of the 33 studies, 7 (21.2%) included external validation. Overall, most investigations showed good to excellent prediction of GS and adverse pathology with MRI-derived radiomic features. Direct prediction of treatment outcomes, however, is an ongoing investigation. As these studies mature and reach potential for clinical integration, concerted effort to validate these radiomic models must be undertaken.

Impact of 18F-DCFPyL PET on Staging and Treatment of Unfavorable Intermediate or High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Background Data regarding 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[¹⁸F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (¹⁸F-DCFPyL) PET in primary staging of prostate cancer (PCa) are limited. Purpose To compare the performance of ¹⁸F-DCFPyL PET/CT or PET/MRI (PET) with bone scan and CT with or without multiparametric MRI (hereafter, referred to as conventional imaging) in the initial staging of men with unfavorable intermediate or high-risk PCa and to assess treatment change after PET. Materials and Methods This prospective study evaluated men with biopsy-proven, untreated, unfavorable intermediate or high-risk PCa with 0 to four metastases or equivocal for extensive metastases (more than four) who underwent PET between May 2018 and December 2020. The diagnostic performance of PET in detecting pelvic nodal and distant metastases was compared with conventional imaging alone. Metastatic sites at conventional imaging and PET were compared with a composite reference standard including histopathologic analysis, correlative imaging, and/or clinical and biochemical follow-up. The intended treatment before PET was compared with the treatment plan established after performing PET. Detection rate, sensitivity, and specificity of conventional imaging and PET were compared by using McNemar exact test on paired proportions. Results The study consisted of 108 men (median age, 66 years; IQR, 61-73 years) with no metastases (n = 84), with oligometastases (four or fewer metastases; 22 men), or with equivocal findings for extensive metastases (n = 2). Detection rates at PET and conventional imaging for nodal metastases were 34% (37 of 108) and 11% (12 of 108) (P < .001), respectively, and those for distant metastases were 22% (24 of 108) and 10% (11 of 108) (P = .02), respectively. PET altered stage in 43 of 108 (40%) and treatment in 24 of 108 (22%) men. The most frequent treatment change was from systemic to local-regional therapy in 10 of 108 (9%) and from local-regional to systemic therapy in nine of 108 (8%) men. Equivocal findings were encountered less frequently with PET (one of 108; 1%) than with conventional imaging (29 of 108; 27%). Conclusion Initial staging with 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[¹⁸F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (¹⁸F-DCFPyL) PET after conventional imaging (bone scan and CT with or without multiparametric MRI) helped to detect more nodal and distant metastases than conventional imaging alone and changed treatment in 22% of men. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03535831, NCT03718260 © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Jadvar in this issue.

External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era

Introduction

To externally validate and directly compare the performance of the Briganti 2012 and Briganti 2019 nomograms as predictors of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a cohort of patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND).

Materials and Methods

After the exclusion of patients with incomplete biopsy, imaging, or clinical data, 752 patients who underwent RARP and ePLND between December 2014 to August 2021 at our center, were included. Among these patients, 327 (43.5%) had undergone multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy. The preoperative risk of LNI was calculated for all patients using the Briganti 2012 nomogram, while the Briganti 2019 nomogram was used only in patients who had performed mpMRI with the combination of targeted and systematic biopsy. The performances of Briganti 2012 and 2019 models were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis, calibrations plot, and decision curve analysis.

Results

A median of 13 (IQR 9–18) nodes per patient was removed, and 78 (10.4%) patients had LNI at final pathology. The area under the curves (AUCs) for Briganti 2012 and 2019 were 0.84 and 0.82, respectively. The calibration plots showed a good correlation between the predicted probabilities and the observed proportion of LNI for both models, with a slight tendency to underestimation. The decision curve analysis (DCA) of the two models was similar, with a slightly higher net benefit for Briganti 2012 nomogram. In patients receiving both systematic- and targeted-biopsy, the Briganti 2012 accuracy was 0.85, and no significant difference was found between the AUCs of 2012 and 2019 nomograms (p = 0.296). In the sub-cohort of 518 (68.9%) intermediate-risk PCa patients, the Briganti 2012 nomogram outperforms the 2019 model in terms of accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.77), calibration curve, and net benefit at DCA.

Conclusion

The direct comparison of the two nomograms showed that the most updated nomogram, which included MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy data, was not significantly more accurate than the 2012 model in the prediction of LNI, suggesting a negligible role of mpMRI in the current population.

Head-to-Head Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and Multiparametric MRI for Pelvic Lymph Node Staging Prior to Radical Prostatectomy in Patients With Intermediate to High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and mpMRI for pelvic lymph node staging prior to radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer (PCa) patients based on per patient data.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched until October 2020 for eligible studies evaluating head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and mpMRI for the detection of pelvic lymph node metastases (PLNMs) using pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) as gold standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the summary receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) were determined for the two imaging modalities.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 640 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT vs. mpMRI were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.48-0.86) vs. 0.40 (95% CI: 0.16-0.71), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.95) vs. 0.92 (95% CI: 0.80-0.97), and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.95) vs. 0.82 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86), respectively. There was substantial heterogeneity for both imaging modalities, and meta-regression analysis revealed that the number of patients, prevalence of PLNMs, PSA level, reference standard, and risk classification might be the potential causes of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of head-to-head comparison studies confirms that there is a trend toward a higher sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT compared to mpMRI for the detection of PLNMs in PCa patients. Nevertheless, according to current guidelines, PLND still needs to be recommended in case of negative results from 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT due to significant risk of malignancy.

Comparison of 68Ga-labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context

In December 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration approved a ⁶⁸Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11) for positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) metastasis who are candidates for initial definitive therapy. ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET is increasingly performed for these patients and is usually combined with computed tomography (CT). In recent years, ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET has been combined with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is beneficial for T staging and may further enhance the staging of primary PCa.

Objective

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/MRI with ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/CT for staging of primary PCa.

Evidence acquisition

A comprehensive literature search was performed using Embase, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to June 24, 2021 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Evidence synthesis

The search identified 2632 articles, of which 27 were included. The diagnostic accuracy of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/MRI, measured as the pooled natural logarithm of diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR), was 2.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21–3.32) for detection of extracapsular extension (ECE), 3.50 (95% CI 2.14–4.86) for seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and 4.73 (95% CI 2.93–6.52) for lymph node metastasis (LNM). For ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/CT, the analysis showed lnDOR of 2.45 (95% CI 0.75–4.14), 2.94 (95% CI 2.26–3.63), and 2.42 (95% CI 2.07–2.78) for detection of ECE, SVI, and LNM, respectively. The overall risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed as moderate and low, respectively.

Conclusions

⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/MRI shows high diagnostic accuracy equivalent to that of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/CT for detection of ECE, SVI, and LNM in staging of PCa. There is an urgent need for direct comparison of the two diagnostic tests in future research.

Patient summary

The use of radioactively labeled molecules that bind to prostate-specific membrane antigen (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA) for positron emission tomography (PET) scans combined with either computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasing for prostate cancer diagnosis. There is a need for direct comparison of the two tests to demonstrate the benefit of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/MRI for determining tumor stage in prostate cancer.

Take  Home Message

After the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of ⁶⁸Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand (⁶⁸Ga-PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) for staging of primary prostate cancer (PCa), it is expected that the use of this imaging modality will increase rapidly. Our review of the literature shows that ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/magnetic resonance imaging has high diagnostic accuracy equivalent to that of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA PET/computed tomography in primary PCa staging. There is an urgent need for direct head-to-head comparison of the two diagnostic tests in future research.

The visibility of prostate cancer concerning underlying histopathological variances: A single-center multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging study

PURPOSE

To investigate whether prostate cancer (PCa) lesions regarding histopathological composition exhibit different morphological features on multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI).

METHODS

We investigated men with PCa with available mpMRI and whole-mount specimens between June 2015 to December 2020.The acquisition protocol consistent with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). Two observers evaluated the images following the PI-RADS v2.1. guideline before biopsy and radical prostatectomy. The discrepancies were resolved in a joint meeting. A genitourinary pathologist reviewed the whole-digitalized mount specimens, and the lesions with Gleason score of 7 and above (3 + 4 and above), and/or cancers with a maximum diameter of 6 mm and more, and/or extraprostatic extension were accepted as clinically significant PCa. The PI-RADS scores and the diameter of the clinically significant PCa on mpMRI concerning histopathological components (i.e., cribriform component, intraductal pattern, or without cribriform component or intraductal pattern) were investigated. The clinically significant PCa foci with PI-RADS score <3 was accepted as an invisible lesion on mpMRI.

RESULTS

In all, 58 men with a total of 112 clinically significant PCa foci, were enrolled in the study. The intraductal pattern, cribriform pattern, or none of these patterns were observed in 28/112 (25 %), 43/112 (38.05 %), and 41/112 (36.60 %) tumor foci. Six out of 28 (21.42 %), 17/43 (39.53 %), and 18/41 (42.8 %) foci with an intraductal pattern, cribriform component, or without any of them, respectively, were invisible on mpMRI (P = 0.111).

CONCLUSION

Though it was not reached a statistical significance, clinically significant PCa with the cribriform component and without any intraductal or cribriform component are more likely to manifests mpMRI invisible foci than the intraductal pattern. Further multi-center studies are warranted to precisely elucidate mpMRI features of PCa regarding histopathological composition.