ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2024
Is there a comparable Mp-MRI for incidental prostate uptake on 18 F-FDG PET/CT?
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prostatic incidental uptake on PET/CT: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence and malignancy risk.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough 18 F-FDG-PET/CT is helpful in defining many types of cancer, localized prostate cancer should not be treated with this technique. This study describes the use of multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) to characterize incidental 18 F-FDG uptake in the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: While 18 F-FDG-PET/CT is useful for characterizing a variety of cancers, it is not advised for prostate cancer that is localized. This work investigates the use of mpMRI to describe incidental 18 F-FDG uptake in the prostate.mpMRI included T2-weighted (T2W), dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) sequences. Patients were classified according to PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) version 2.1 by an experienced uroradiologist, and 18 F-FDG-PET was evaluated to determine whether the area of involvement on CT had a counterpart in mpMRI. A biopsy was performed on 30 of the 92 patients. These patients' maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) 6 < and ≥ 6, PS(PSA) density 0.15 < and ≥ 0.15, PSA level, uptake pattern (focal involvement/diffuse involvement), and PI-RADS scores were compared. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. Logistic regression was used to analyze PI-RADS score groups age, PSA, PSA density and SUVmax.
resultsIn the study, 92 patients with incidental 18 F-FDG-PET/CT prostate uptake were examined. Median age was 66, PSA median was 3.6 ng/ml (range: 0-3198 ng/ml). Notably, in 70.6% of cases, PET/CT uptake didn't correlate with mp-MRI findings. Among PI-RADS 3-4-5 patients (29.3%), there was a correlation. Biopsies in 30 patients revealed 43.3% benign, 56.7% malignant. Significant differences between benign and malignant cases were observed in PSA density, PI-RADS scores, and PSA levels (p < .05), while SUVmax and uptake pattern were not significant. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, PI-RADS score groups were found to be independent risk factors for predicting malignancy.
conclusionsOur study showed that incidental 18 F-FDG-PET/CT prostate uptake was detected and that high PSA density values, PI-RADS scores, and PSA values, such as in routine patients, and not PET-CT findings such as SUVmax and uptake pattern, were more predictive of malignancy.
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.