ArticleEJNMMI reports2025
Semi-standardized evaluation of extraprostatic extension and seminal vesicle invasion with [
Article in EJNMMI reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Head-to-head comparison of [¹⁸F]F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT and [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for intraprostatic tumour detection and localisation using histopathology as reference: A prospective single-centre diagnostic accuracy study.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Limited incremental prognostic value of pretreatment MRI andAbdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Addition of quantitative imaging parameters to visual analysis improves the accuracy of PSMA PET/CT for the local staging of primary prostate cancer.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Navigating discordant findings in multimodality imaging of prostate cancer in the MRI and PSMA-PET era.La Radiologia medica · 2026Review
- Interreader agreement of intraprostatic prostate cancer detection, local extension and staging using [EJNMMI research · 2026Article
- Evaluating extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer: pragmatic integration of MRI and PSMA-PET/CT.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Impact ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPositron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with prostate specific membrane antigen ligands (PSMA) is established for use in primary staging of prostate cancer to screen for metastases. It has also shown promise in local tumor staging, including detection of extraprostatic extension (EPE) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI). Previous studies have shown high heterogeneity in methods and results. Our aim was to compare [
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity for detecting EPE with the quantitative LCC method for PSMA PET/CT was 0.46/0.91, for the visual method 0.28/0.82 and for the combination of the two 0.54/0.76. AUC in ROC analysis for the LCC method was 0.70. For MRI the sensitivity and specificity were 0.80/0.64. For SVI, PET/CT and MRI had sensitivity and specificity of 0.14/1.0 and 0.50/0.92 respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the PET LCC measurement was 0.68, the kappa values for the visual Likert scales for PET were 0.53 for EPE and 0.63 for SVI.
conclusionsIn this study, we attempted to standardize quantitative and qualitative PSMA PET/CT evaluation of EPE and SVI and compare the method with MRI. MRI had a higher sensitivity for EPE while PSMA had a higher specificity. For SVI, both methods had high specificity. The interrater reliability for the PSMA PET/CT evaluations was moderate to substantial.
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.