ArticlePloS one2023
Assessment of 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT and PET/MR quantitative parameters for reference standard organs: Inter-reader, inter-modality, and inter-patient variability.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reference tissue uptake of [18F]PSMA-1007 in positron emission tomography of recurrent prostate cancer.European radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of lesion contrast in the walk-through long axial FOV PET scanner simulated with XCAT anthropomorphic phantoms.EJNMMI physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-based radiotracers have shown promise for prostate cancer assessment. Evaluation of quantitative variability and establishment of reference standards are important for optimal clinical and research utility. This work evaluates the variability of PSMA-based [18F]DCFPyL (PyL) PET quantitative reference standards. Consecutive eligible patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer were recruited for study participation from August 2016-October 2017. After PyL tracer injection, whole body PET/CT (wbPET/CT) was obtained with subsequent whole body PET/MR (wbPET/MR). Two readers independently created regions of interest (ROIs) including a 40% standardized uptake value (SUV) threshold ROI of the whole right parotid gland and separate spherical ROIs in the superior, mid, and inferior gland. Additional liver (right lobe) and blood pool spherical ROIs were defined. Bland-Altman analysis, including limits of agreement (LOA), as well as interquartile range (IQR) and coefficient of variance (CoV) was used. Twelve patients with prostate cancer were recruited (mean age, 61.8 yrs; range 54-72 years). One patient did not have wbPET/MR and was excluded. There was minimal inter-reader SUVmean variability (bias±LOA) for blood pool (-0.13±0.42; 0.01±0.41), liver (-0.55±0.82; -0.22±1.3), or whole parotid gland (-0.05±0.31; 0.08±0.24) for wbPET/CT and wbPET/MR, respectively. Greater inter-reader variability for the 1-cm parotid gland ROIs was present, for both wbPET/CT and wbPET/MR. Comparing wbPET/CT to the subsequently acquired wbPET/MR, blood pool had a slight decrease in SUVmean. The liver as well as parotid gland showed a slight increase in activity although the absolute bias only ranged from 0.45-1.28. The magnitude of inter-subject variability was higher for the parotid gland regardless of modality or reader. In conclusion, liver, blood pool, and whole parotid gland quantitation show promise as reliable reference normal organs for clinical/research PET applications. Variability with 1-cm parotid ROIs may limit its use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.