Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33566470›Full record

SynthesisInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology

68Ga-Prostate-specific membrane antigen (psma) positron emission tomography (pet) in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cristina S Matushita, Ana M Marques da Silva, Phelipi N Schuck, Matteo Bardisserotto, Diego B Piant, Jonatas L Pereira, Juliano J Cerci, George B Coura-Filho, Fabio P Esteves, Barbara J Amorim and 9 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Dual targeting PET tracer [Theranostics · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Update on PSMA-based Prostate Cancer Imaging.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. PSMA PET-CT in the Diagnosis and Staging of Prostate Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Diagnostic value of integratedProstate international · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Diagnostic Performance and Clinical Impact ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.

Cristina S MatushitaInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Ana M Marques da SilvaInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Phelipi N SchuckLaboratório de Imagens Médicas, Faculdade de Ciências, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Matteo BardisserottoClínica Kozma - Balneário Camboriú, SC, Brasil.
Diego B PiantInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Jonatas L PereiraInstituto Hospital Erasto Gaertner, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
Juliano J CerciQuanta Diagnóstico e Terapia, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.
George B Coura-FilhoDepartamento de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto do Câncer de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Fabio P EstevesOncoPETscan, Blumenau, SC, Brasil.
Barbara J AmorimDepartamento de Medicina Nuclear, Universidade Estadual de Campinas - UNICAMP, Campinas, SP, Brasil.
Gustavo V GomesNúcleos Centro de Medicina Nuclear, Guará, SP, Brasil.
Ana Emília T BritoReal Hospital Português de Beneficência, Pernambuco, PE, Brasil.
Wanderley M BernardoPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Medicina, Faculdade de Medicina - USP, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Eduardo MundstockPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Saúde da Criança, Faculdade de Medicina, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Stefano FantiDepartment of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialized Medicine-DIMES, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Bruna MacedoInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Diego H RomanInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Cinthia Scatolin Tem-PassPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Saúde da Criança, Faculdade de Medicina, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Bruno HochheggerInstituto do Cérebro do Rio Grande do Sul, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
Instituto do Cérebro · BRPontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul · BRFundação Faculdade de Medicina · BRHospital Erasto Gaertner · BRInstituto de Oncologia do Paraná · BRInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo · BRQuanta Computer (China) · CNReal Hospital Português · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversity of Bologna · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionProstate cancer (PC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in males. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT, a non-invasive diagnostic tool to evaluate PC with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression, has emerged as a more accurate alternative to assess disease staging. We aimed to identify predictors of positive 68Ga-PSMA PET and the accuracy of this technique. MATERIALS AND

methodsDiagnostic accuracy cross-sectional study with prospective and retrospective approaches. We performed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase database in search of studies including PC patients submitted to radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy with curative intent and presented biochemical recurrence following ASTRO 1996 criteria. A total of 35 studies involving 3910 patients submitted to 68-Ga-PSMA PET were included and independently assessed by two authors: 8 studies on diagnosis, four on staging, and 23 studies on restaging purposes. The significance level was α=0.05.

resultspooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (0.86-0.93) and 0.90 (0.82-0.96), respectively, for diagnostic purposes; as for staging, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.93 (0.86-0.98) and 0.96 (0.92-0.99), respectively. In the restaging scenario, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.76 (0.74-0.78) and 0.45 (0.27-0.58), respectively, considering the identification of prostate cancer in each described situation. We also obtained specificity and sensitivity results for PSA subdivisions.

conclusion68Ga-PSMA PET provides higher sensitivity and specificity than traditional imaging for prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMalePositron-Emission TomographyProspective StudiesRadiopharmaceuticalsRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedRadiopharmaceuticals(225)Ac-PSMA-617 [Supplementary Concept]Glu-NH-CO-NH-Lys-(Ahx)-((68)Ga(HBED-CC)) [Supplementary Concept]Prostate cancer, familial [Supplementary Concept]

Identifiers

PMID33566470
PMCPMC8321470
OpenAlexW3128314425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.