We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of hybrid 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT/CT for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients: Additional value of morphologic information from low dose CT.
European Radiology 2018 Februrary
PURPOSE: This study compared 68 Gallium-prostate-specific-membrane-antigen based Positron-emission-tomography (68 Ga-PSMA-PET) and 99metastable technetium-3,3-diphospho-1,2-propanedicarbonacid (99m Tc-DPD-SPECT) in performing skeletal staging in prostate cancer (PC) patients and evaluated the additional value of the information from low-dose-computed tomography (CT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 54 patients who received 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT/CT within 80 days were extracted from our database. Osseous lesions were classified as benign, malignant or equivocal. Lesion, region and patient based analysis was performed with and without CT fusion. The reference standard was generated by defining a best valuable comparator (BVC) containing information from all available data.
RESULTS: In the patient based analysis, accuracies measured as "area-under-the-curve" (AUC) for 68 Ga-PSMA-PET, 99m Tc-SPECT, 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99m Tc-SPECT/CT were 0.97-0.96, 0.86-0.83, 1.00 and 0.83, respectively (p<0.05) (ranges = optimistic vs. pessimistic view). Region based analysis resulted in the following sensitivities and specificities: 91.8-97.7%, 100-99.5% (PET); 61.2-70.6%, 99.8-98.3% (SPECT); 97.7%, 100% (PET/CT), 69.4% and 98.3% (SPECT/CT) (p<0.05). The amount of correct classifications of equivocal lesions by CT was significantly higher in PET (100%) compared to SPECT (52.4%) (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: 68 Ga-PSMA-PET outperforms 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT in detecting bone metastases in PC patients. Additional information from low-dose-CT resulted in a significant reduction in equivocal lesions in both modalities, however 68 Ga-PSMA-PET benefited most.
KEY POINTS: • Ga-PSMA-PET outperforms 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT in skeletal staging in prostate cancer patients • Proportion of equivocal decisions was significantly reduced by CT-fusion in both modalities • Ga-PSMA-PET benefits more from CT information, compared to 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 54 patients who received 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT/CT within 80 days were extracted from our database. Osseous lesions were classified as benign, malignant or equivocal. Lesion, region and patient based analysis was performed with and without CT fusion. The reference standard was generated by defining a best valuable comparator (BVC) containing information from all available data.
RESULTS: In the patient based analysis, accuracies measured as "area-under-the-curve" (AUC) for 68 Ga-PSMA-PET, 99m Tc-SPECT, 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99m Tc-SPECT/CT were 0.97-0.96, 0.86-0.83, 1.00 and 0.83, respectively (p<0.05) (ranges = optimistic vs. pessimistic view). Region based analysis resulted in the following sensitivities and specificities: 91.8-97.7%, 100-99.5% (PET); 61.2-70.6%, 99.8-98.3% (SPECT); 97.7%, 100% (PET/CT), 69.4% and 98.3% (SPECT/CT) (p<0.05). The amount of correct classifications of equivocal lesions by CT was significantly higher in PET (100%) compared to SPECT (52.4%) (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: 68 Ga-PSMA-PET outperforms 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT in detecting bone metastases in PC patients. Additional information from low-dose-CT resulted in a significant reduction in equivocal lesions in both modalities, however 68 Ga-PSMA-PET benefited most.
KEY POINTS: • Ga-PSMA-PET outperforms 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT in skeletal staging in prostate cancer patients • Proportion of equivocal decisions was significantly reduced by CT-fusion in both modalities • Ga-PSMA-PET benefits more from CT information, compared to 99m Tc-DPD-SPECT.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app