001     180464
005     20240229145619.0
024 7 _ |a 10.3389/fonc.2022.898774
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:35747822
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a pmc:PMC9209705
|2 pmc
024 7 _ |a altmetric:127613522
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2022-01343
041 _ _ |a English
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Spohn, Simon K B
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 0
245 _ _ |a Risk Factors for Biochemical Recurrence After PSMA-PET-Guided Definitive Radiotherapy in Patients With De Novo Lymph Node-Positive Prostate Cancer.
260 _ _ |a Lausanne
|c 2022
|b Frontiers Media
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1674638153_18725
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as the preferred treatment option for newly diagnosed node-positive (cN1) prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, implementation of positron emission tomography targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA-PET) in the staging of primary PCa patients has a significant impact on RT treatment concepts. This study aims to evaluate outcomes and their respective risk factors on patients with PSMA-PET-based cN1 and/or cM1a PCa receiving primary RT and ADT.Forty-eight patients with cN0 and/or cM1a PCa staged by [18F]PSMA-1007-PET (n = 19) or [68Ga]PSMA-11-PET (n = 29) were retrospectively included. All patients received EBRT to the pelvis ± boost to positive nodes, followed by boost to the prostate. The impact of different PET-derived characteristics such as maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) and number of PET-positive lymph nodes on biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) (Phoenix criteria) and metastasis-free survival (MFS) was determined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses.Median follow-up was 24 months. Median initial serum prostate-specific antigen was 20.2 ng/ml (IQR 10.2-54.2). Most patients had cT stage ≥ 3 (63%) and ISUP grade ≥ 3 (85%). Median dose to the prostate, elective nodes, and PET-positive nodes was 75 Gy, 45 Gy, and 55 Gy, respectively. Ninety percent of patients received ADT with a median duration of 9 months (IQR 6-18). In univariate analysis, cM1a stage (p = 0.03), number of >2 pelvic nodes (p = 0.01), number of >1 abdominal node (p = 0.02), and SUVmax values ≥ median (8.1 g/ml for 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 7.9 g/ml for 18F-PSMA-1007) extracted from lymph nodes were significantly associated with unfavorable BRFS, but classical clinicopathological features were not. Number of >2 pelvic nodes (n = 0.03), number of >1 abdominal node (p = 0.03), and SUVmax values ≥ median extracted from lymph nodes were associated with unfavorable MFS. In multivariate analysis, number of >2 pelvic lymph nodes was significantly associated with unfavorable BRFS (HR 5.2, p = 0.01) and SUVmax values ≥ median extracted from lymph nodes had unfavorable MFS (HR 6.3, p = 0.02).More than 2 PET-positive pelvic lymph nodes are associated with unfavorable BRFS, and high SUVmax values are associated with unfavorable MFS. Thus, the number of PET-positive lymph nodes and the SUVmax value might be relevant prognosticators to identify patients with favorable outcomes.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315
|c POF4-315
|f POF IV
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
650 _ 7 |a PSMA-PET/CT
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a lymph node positive
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a personalization
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a prostate cancer
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a radiotherapy
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a risk factors
|2 Other
700 1 _ |a Birkenmaier, Viktoria
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Ruf, Juri
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Mix, Michael
|b 3
700 1 _ |a Sigle, August
|b 4
700 1 _ |a Haehl, Erik
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Adebahr, Sonja
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 6
700 1 _ |a Sprave, Tanja
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 7
700 1 _ |a Gkika, Eleni
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 8
700 1 _ |a Rühle, Alexander
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 9
700 1 _ |a Nicolay, Nils H
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 10
700 1 _ |a Kirste, Simon
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 11
700 1 _ |a Grosu, Anca L
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 12
700 1 _ |a Zamboglou, Constantinos
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 13
773 _ _ |a 10.3389/fonc.2022.898774
|g Vol. 12, p. 898774
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2649216-7
|p 898774
|t Frontiers in oncology
|v 12
|y 2022
|x 2234-943X
909 C O |p VDB
|o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:180464
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 5
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 6
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 7
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 8
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 9
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 10
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 11
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 12
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 13
|6 P:(DE-HGF)0
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Gesundheit
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF4
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|v Bildgebung und Radioonkologie
|x 0
914 1 _ |y 2022
915 _ _ |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)
|0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV
|2 V:(DE-HGF)
|b DOAJ
|d 2021-01-27
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0160
|2 StatID
|b Essential Science Indicators
|d 2021-01-27
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0113
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
|d 2021-01-27
915 _ _ |a Article Processing Charges
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0561
|2 StatID
|d 2021-01-27
915 _ _ |a Fees
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0700
|2 StatID
|d 2021-01-27
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b FRONT ONCOL : 2021
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ Seal
|d 2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ
|d 2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ : Blind peer review
|d 2021-05-11T13:25:45Z
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
|d 2022-11-08
915 _ _ |a IF >= 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9905
|2 StatID
|b FRONT ONCOL : 2021
|d 2022-11-08
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)FR01-20160331
|k FR01
|l DKTK FR zentral
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E055-20160331
|k E055
|l E055 KKE Molekulare Radioonkologie
|x 1
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)FR01-20160331
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E055-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21