Reliability and practicability of PSMA-RADS 1.0 for structured reporting of PSMA-PET/CT scans in prostate cancer patients.
PSMA
Positron emission tomography computed tomography
Prostate cancer
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Aug 2023
25 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
13
03
2023
accepted:
12
07
2023
revised:
03
06
2023
medline:
25
8
2023
pubmed:
25
8
2023
entrez:
25
8
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
As structured reporting is increasingly used in the evaluation of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) for prostate cancer, there is a need to assess the reliability of these frameworks. This study aimed to evaluate the intra- and interreader agreement among readers with varying levels of experience using PSMA-RADS 1.0 for interpreting PSMA-PET/CT scans, even when blinded to clinical data, and therefore to determine the feasibility of implementing this reporting system in clinical practice. PSMA-PET/CT scans of 103 patients were independently evaluated by 4 readers with different levels of experience according to the reporting and data system (RADS) for PSMA-PET/CT imaging PSMA-RADS 1.0 at 2 time points within 6 weeks. For each scan, a maximum of five target lesions were freely chosen and stratified according to PSMA-RADS 1.0. Overall scan score and compartment-based scores were assessed. Intra- and interreader agreement was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). PSMA-RADS 1.0 demonstrated excellent interreader agreement for both overall scan scores (ICC ≥ 0.91) and compartment-based scores (ICC ≥ 0.93) across all four readers. The framework showed excellent intrareader agreement for overall scan scores (ICC ≥ 0.86) and compartment-based scores (ICC ≥ 0.95), even among readers with varying levels of experience. PSMA-RADS 1.0 is a reliable method for assessing PSMA-PET/CT with strong consistency and agreement among readers. It shows great potential for establishing a standard approach to diagnosing and planning treatment for prostate cancer patients, and can be used confidently even by readers with less experience. This study underlines that PSMA-RADS 1.0 is a valuable and highly reliable scoring system for PSMA-PET/CT scans of prostate cancer patients and can be used confidently by radiologists with different levels of experience in routine clinical practice. PSMA-RADS version 1.0 is a scoring system for PSMA-PET/CT scans. Its reproducibility needs to be analyzed in order to make it applicable to clinical practice. Excellent interreader and intrareader agreement for overall scan scores and compartment-based scores using PSMA-RADS 1.0 were seen in readers with varying levels of experience. PSMA-RADS 1.0 is a reliable tool for accurately diagnosing and planning treatment for prostate cancer patients, and can be used confidently in clinical routine.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37624414
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-10083-7
pii: 10.1007/s00330-023-10083-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Jeitner TM, Babich JW, Kelly JM (2022) Advances in PSMA theranostics. Translational. Oncology 22:101450
Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL et al (2015) The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:197–209
doi: 10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6
pubmed: 25411132
Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I et al (2016) Diagnostic efficacy of (68)gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 195:1436–1443
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.025
pubmed: 26682756
Schäfer M, Bauder-Wüst U, Leotta K et al (2012) A dimerized urea-based inhibitor of the prostate-specific membrane antigen for 68Ga-PET imaging of prostate cancer. EJNMMI Research 2:23
doi: 10.1186/2191-219X-2-23
pubmed: 22673157
pmcid: 3502552
Rahbar K, Afshar-Oromieh A, Jadvar H, Ahmadzadehfar H (2018) PSMA theranostics: current status and future directions. Mol Imaging 17:1536012118776068
doi: 10.1177/1536012118776068
pubmed: 29873291
pmcid: 5992796
Sartor O, de Bono J, Chi KN et al (2021) Lutetium-177–PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 385:1091–1103
Sheikhbahaei S, Afshar-Oromieh A, Eiber M et al (2017) Pearls and pitfalls in clinical interpretation of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:2117–2136
doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3780-7
pubmed: 28765998
Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M et al (2023) PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Molecul Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-06089-w
Rowe SP, Pienta KJ, Pomper MG, Gorin MA (2018) Proposal for a structured reporting system for prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted PET imaging: PSMA-RADS version 1.0. J Nucl Med 59:479–485
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.195255
pubmed: 28887401
pmcid: 6910634
Eiber M, Herrmann K, Calais J et al (2018) Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation (PROMISE): proposed miTNM classification for the interpretation of PSMA-ligand PET/CT. J Nucl Med 59:469–478
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.198119
pubmed: 29123012
Ceci F, Oprea-Lager DE, Emmett L et al (2021) E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Molecul Imaging 48:1626–1638
Fanti S, Minozzi S, Morigi JJ et al (2017) Development of standardized image interpretation for 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT to detect prostate cancer recurrent lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:1622–1635
doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3725-1
pubmed: 28536833
Emmett L, Papa N, Buteau J et al (2022) The PRIMARY score: using intraprostatic (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT patterns to optimize prostate cancer diagnosis. J Nucl Med 63:1644–1650
pubmed: 35301240
pmcid: 9635676
Fanti S, Hadaschik B, Herrmann K (2020) Proposal for systemic-therapy response-assessment criteria at the time of PSMA PET/CT imaging: the PSMA PET progression criteria. Nucl Med 61:678–682
Gafita A, Rauscher I, Weber M et al (2022) Novel framework for treatment response evaluation using PSMA PET/CT in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (RECIP 1.0): an international multicenter study. J Nucl Med 63:1651–1658
Rowe SP, Pienta KJ, Pomper MG, Gorin MA (2018) PSMA-RADS version 1.0: a step towards standardizing the interpretation and reporting of PSMA-targeted PET imaging studies. Eur Urol 73:485–487
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.10.027
pubmed: 29132714
Werner RA, Bundschuh RA, Bundschuh L et al (2018) Interobserver agreement for the standardized reporting system PSMA-RADS 1.0 on (18)F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med 59:1857–1864
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.118.217588
pubmed: 30190304
pmcid: 6278904
Yin Y, Werner RA, Higuchi T et al (2019) Follow-up of lesions with equivocal radiotracer uptake on PSMA-targeted PET in patients with prostate cancer: predictive values of the PSMARADS-3A and PSMA-RADS-3B categories. J Nucl Med 60:511–516
Cardinale J, Schäfer M, Benešová M et al (2017) Preclinical evaluation of (18)F-PSMA-1007, a new prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand for prostate cancer imaging. J Nucl Med 58:425-431
Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment 6(4):284–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284
Herrmann K, Giovanella L, Santos A et al (2022) Joint EANM, SNMMI and IAEA enabling guide: how to set up a theranostics centre. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:2300–2309
doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-05785-x
pubmed: 35403861
pmcid: 9165261
Werner RA, Bundschuh RA, Bundschuh L et al (2018) Interobserver agreement for the standardized reporting system PSMA-RADS 1.0 on
Toriihara A, Nobashi T, Baratto L et al (2020) Comparison of 3 interpretation criteria for (68)Ga-PSMA11 PET based on inter- and intrareader agreement. J Nucl Med 61:533-539
Bundschuh RA, Lütje S, Bundschuh L et al (2023) High interobserver agreement on PSMA PET/CT even in the absence of clinical data. Clin Nucl Med 48(3):207–212
Schmidkonz C, Cordes M, Goetz TI et al (2019) 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT derived quantitative volumetric tumor parameters for classification and evaluation of therapeutic response of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med 33:766–775
Farolfi A, Calderoni L, Mattana F et al (2021) Current and emerging clinical applications of PSMA PET diagnostic imaging for prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 62:596
Carioli G, Bertuccio P, Boffetta P et al (2020) European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2020 with a focus on prostate cancer. Ann Oncol 31:650–658
Cherry SR, Jones T, Karp JS, Qi J, Moses WW, Badawi RD (2018) Total-body PET: maximizing sensitivity to create new opportunities for clinical research and patient care. J Nucl Med 59:3–12
Alberts I, Prenosil G, Sachpekidis C et al (2020) Digital versus analogue PET in [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for recurrent prostate cancer: a matched-pair comparison. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47:614–623
doi: 10.1007/s00259-019-04630-y
pubmed: 31792572
Alberts I, Hünermund JN, Sachpekidis C et al (2021) The influence of digital PET/CT on diagnostic certainty and interrater reliability in [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for recurrent prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 31:8030–8039
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07870-5
pubmed: 33856522
pmcid: 8452558
Gafita A, Rauscher I, Fendler WP et al (2022) Measuring response in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer using PSMA PET/CT: comparison of RECIST 1.1, aPCWG3, aPERCIST, PPP, and RECIP 1.0 criteria. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:4271–4281
Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M et al (2023) PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 50:1466–1486
doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-06089-w
pubmed: 36604326
pmcid: 10027805
Werner RA, Bundschuh RA, Bundschuh L et al (2019) Novel structured reporting systems for theranostic radiotracers. J Nucl Med 60:577–584
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.118.223537
pubmed: 30796171
pmcid: 6495242
Werner RA, Bundschuh RA, Bundschuh L et al (2018) Molecular imaging reporting and data systems (MI-RADS): a generalizable framework for targeted radiotracers with theranostic implications. Ann Nucl Med 32:512–522
doi: 10.1007/s12149-018-1291-7
pubmed: 30109562
pmcid: 6182628
Werner RA, Thackeray JT, Pomper MG et al (2019) Recent updates on molecular imaging reporting and data systems (MI-RADS) for theranostic radiotracers-navigating pitfalls of SSTR- and PSMA-targeted PET/CT. J Clin Med 8
Grawe F, Ebner R, Geyer T et al (2023) Validation of the SSTR-RADS 1.0 for the structured interpretation of SSTR-PET/CT and treatment planning in neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients. Eur Radiol 33:3416–3424
doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-09518-y
pubmed: 36964768
pmcid: 10121493