Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32394269›Full record

ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2020

Does bone scintigraphy still have a role in the era of 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer?

Duygu Has Simsek, Yasemin Sanli, Caner Civan, Muge Nur Engin, Emine Goknur Isik, Zeynep Gozde Ozkan, Serkan Kuyumcu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Diagnostic accuracy ofJapanese journal of radiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Paget's Disease Mimicking Prostate Cancer Metastasis withMolecular imaging and radionuclide therapy · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Comparison of PSMA-basedAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Duygu Has SimsekDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey. dr.duyguhas@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6945-2003
Yasemin SanliDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Caner CivanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Muge Nur EnginDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Emine Goknur IsikDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Zeynep Gozde OzkanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Serkan KuyumcuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, 34093, Fatih, İstanbul, Turkey.
Istanbul University · TRFatih University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectionWe aimed to evaluate the role of bone scintigraphy (BS) which has long been the imaging modality of choice in prostate cancer (PCa) and performed a head-to-head comparison between BS, BS + SPECT/CT and 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT, for the detection of bone metastasis of PCa.

methodsWe evaluated 138 PCa patients who underwent BS and 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT and SPECT/CT of 102 of 138 patients. Images were interpreted retrospectively and areas of abnormally increased tracer uptake related to PCa were documented as benign, metastatic or equivocal. Equivocal uptakes were finally diagnosed based on a consensus review of correlative imaging. Patient- and lesion-based analysis was performed. Patients with superscan images were excluded from lesion-based analysis.

resultsAt least one metastatic or equivocal uptake in skeleton was defined in 76 of 138 (55%) BS, in 33 of 102 (32.3%) SPECT/CT, and in 49 of 138 (35.5%) 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. 23 (16.7%) patients had also superscan findings on BS and 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. For patient-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were calculated as 91.1%, 64.5%, 73.1%, 55.4% and 93.7% for BS; 95.5%, 82.7%, 86.9%, 72.8% and 96.2% for BS + SPECT/CT; 97.7%, 95.7%, 95.6%, 91.6% and 98.8% for 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. For lesion-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were 53%, 63.9%, 60.1%, 42.8% and 71.8% for BS; 59.2%, 87.6%, 77.7%, 62.6% and 80% for BS + SPECT/CT; 96.4%, 98.1%, 97.5%, 96.4% and 98.1% for 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT.

conclusionThis study has shown that 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT overcomes the limitations of BS and proves superiority in detecting bone metastases, even in patients with SPECT/CT. Our findings present important implications that 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT can replace BS in future practice.

Indexed as

OligopeptidesPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAgedAged, 80 and overBone and BonesBone NeoplasmsEdetic AcidFalse Negative ReactionsFalse Positive ReactionsGallium IsotopesGallium RadioisotopesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProstatic NeoplasmsEdetic Acidgallium 68 PSMA-11Gallium IsotopesGallium RadioisotopesOligopeptides68 Ga-PSMABoneCancerPET/CTProstateScintigraphy

Identifiers

PMID32394269
OpenAlexW3025496289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.