000181845 001__ 181845
000181845 005__ 20240229145659.0
000181845 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1186/s40644-022-00489-9
000181845 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:36138437
000181845 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1470-7330
000181845 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1740-5025
000181845 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:136303603
000181845 037__ $$aDKFZ-2022-02260
000181845 041__ $$aEnglish
000181845 082__ $$a610
000181845 1001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)ec15551e1bf57c41065d3502b66b1fe7$$aGlemser, Philip Alexander$$b0$$eFirst author$$udkfz
000181845 245__ $$aHybrid imaging with [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT and PET-MRI in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer.
000181845 260__ $$aLondon$$c2022
000181845 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000181845 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000181845 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1664201555_27603
000181845 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000181845 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000181845 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000181845 500__ $$a#EA:E010#LA:E060#
000181845 520__ $$aTo compare [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT, [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-MRI and MRI in a cohort of prostate cancer (PCa) patients in biochemical recurrence after initial curative therapy.Fifty-three patients with biochemically recurrent PCa underwent whole-body [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT 1 hour post-injection (p.i.) followed by [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-MRI 2.5 hours p.i., including a multiparametric MRI pelvic protocol examination. Imaging data analysis consisted of visual (qualitative) evaluation of the PET-CT, PET-MRI and MRI scans, as well as semi-quantitative and quantitative analyses of the PET and MRI data, including calculation of the parameters standardized uptake value (SUV) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) derived from the PCa lesions. Association analysis was performed between imaging and clinical data, including PSA level and Gleason score. The results were considered significant for p-values less than 0.05 (p < 0.05).The hybrid imaging modalities [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT and PET-MRI were positive in more patients than MRI alone. In particular, PET-CT detected lesions suggestive of PCa relapse in 34/53 (64.2%), PET-MRI in 36/53 (67.9%) and MRI in 23/53 patients (43.4%). While no significant differences in lesion detection rate were observed between PET-CT and PET-MRI, the latter was particularly efficient in detection of local recurrences in the prostate bed mainly due to the contribution of the MRI part of the modality. Association analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in the probability of a positive scan with increasing PSA levels for all imaging modalities. Accordingly, there was no significant association between scan positivity rate and Gleason score for any imaging modality. No significant correlation was observed between SUV and ADC values in lymph node metastases.[68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT and PET-MRI provide equally good detection rates for PCa recurrence, both outperforming stand-alone MRI.
000181845 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$a315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)$$cPOF4-315$$fPOF IV$$x0
000181845 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$aADC
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$aPET-CT
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$aPET-MRI
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$aProstate cancer recurrence
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$aSUV
000181845 650_7 $$2Other$$a[68Ga]PSMA-11 ligand
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)d7135c1486ffd923f71735d40a3d7a0c$$aRotkopf, Lukas Thomas$$b1$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)a56941777fbaf0ca1008366e7e16667f$$aZiener, Christian$$b2$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)c5312d96130619e491466891238cc117$$aBeuthien-Baumann, Bettina$$b3$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)7dc85735e114a4ace658ba1450a2cca6$$aWeru, Vivienn$$b4$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)bb6a7a70f976eb8df1769944bf913596$$aKopp-Schneider, Annette$$b5$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)3d04c8fee58c9ab71f62ff80d06b6fec$$aSchlemmer, Heinz-Peter$$b6$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)b2df3652dfa3e19d5e96dfc53f44a992$$aDimitrakopoulou-Strauss, Antonia$$b7$$udkfz
000181845 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)69d2d5247c019c2a2075502dc11bf0b2$$aSachpekidis, Christos$$b8$$eLast author$$udkfz
000181845 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2104862-9$$a10.1186/s40644-022-00489-9$$gVol. 22, no. 1, p. 53$$n1$$p53$$tCancer imaging$$v22$$x1470-7330$$y2022
000181845 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:181845$$pVDB
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)ec15551e1bf57c41065d3502b66b1fe7$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b0$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)d7135c1486ffd923f71735d40a3d7a0c$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b1$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)a56941777fbaf0ca1008366e7e16667f$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b2$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)c5312d96130619e491466891238cc117$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)7dc85735e114a4ace658ba1450a2cca6$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b4$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)bb6a7a70f976eb8df1769944bf913596$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b5$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)3d04c8fee58c9ab71f62ff80d06b6fec$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b6$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)b2df3652dfa3e19d5e96dfc53f44a992$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b7$$kDKFZ
000181845 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)69d2d5247c019c2a2075502dc11bf0b2$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b8$$kDKFZ
000181845 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vBildgebung und Radioonkologie$$x0
000181845 9141_ $$y2022
000181845 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)$$bDOAJ$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2021-01-29
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2022-08-15T08:21:23Z
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2022-08-15T08:21:23Z
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Peer review$$d2022-08-15T08:21:23Z
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bCANCER IMAGING : 2021$$d2022-11-16
000181845 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9905$$2StatID$$aIF >= 5$$bCANCER IMAGING : 2021$$d2022-11-16
000181845 9202_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E060-20160331$$kE060$$lE060 KKE Nuklearmedizin$$x0
000181845 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E010-20160331$$kE010$$lE010 Radiologie$$x0
000181845 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331$$kC060$$lC060 Biostatistik$$x1
000181845 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E060-20160331$$kE060$$lE060 KKE Nuklearmedizin$$x2
000181845 9200_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E010-20160331$$kE010$$lE010 Radiologie$$x0
000181845 980__ $$ajournal
000181845 980__ $$aVDB
000181845 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E010-20160331
000181845 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)C060-20160331
000181845 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E060-20160331
000181845 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED