Radiolabelled choline versus PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer restaging: a meta-analysis

American Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Matteo Ferrari¹  Giorgio Treglia²  Fern³  Davide G Bosetti⁴  Eleni Oikonomou⁵  Mariarosa Pascale⁶  Sara De Dosso⁷  Ricardo Pereira Mestre⁸ 

[1] Clinic of Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland;Clinic of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona and Lugano, Switzerland;Clinic of Radiation Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland;Clinic of Urology, Regional Hospital of Bellinzona, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland;Clinic of Urology, Regional Hospital of Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Switzerland;Clinical Trial Unit, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland;Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland;Health Technology Assessment Unit, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland

关键词: PET;    positron emission tomography;    choline;    PSMA;    prostate;    PSA;   

DOI  :  

学科分类：过敏症与临床免疫学

来源: e-Century Publishing Corporation

【 摘 要 】

Both radiolabelled choline and prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) could be used in patients with biochemical recurrent prostate cancer (BRPCa). We aimed to perform a meta-analysis about the head-to-head comparison of detection rate (DR) between these methods in BRPCa. A comprehensive literature search of studies listed in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases through October 2018 and regarding the head-to-head comparison of DR between radiolabelled choline and PSMA PET/CT in BRPCa was carried out. Overall pooled DR was calculated on a per patient-based analysis; subgroup analyses taking into account different prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cut-off values were performed. Five studies (257 BRPCa patients) were included. The meta-analysis provided the following overall DR: 56% [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 37-75%] for radiolabelled choline PET/CT and 78% (95% CI: 70-84%) for radiolabelled PSMA PET/CT. Significant difference of DR was found only in patients with PSA ≤ 1 ng/ml [the DR of radiolabelled choline and PSMA PET/CT were 27% (95% CI: 17-39%) and 54% (95% CI: 43-65%), respectively]. Radiolabelled PSMA PET/CT proved to be clearly superior in detecting BRPCa lesions at low PSA levels (≤ 1 ng/ml) when compared to radiolabelled choline PET/CT. On the other hand, the superiority of radiolabelled PSMA PET/CT was less evident in patients with PSA > 1 ng/ml. More studies and in particular cost-effectiveness analyses comparing these imaging methods are warranted.

【 授权许可】

CC BY-NC