ArticleEuropean urology open science2025
How Does Routine Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Modify the Current Management of Prostate Cancer? A Multidisciplinary View.
Article in European urology open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the PSMA PET/CT access gap in prostate cancer: evidence, barriers, and priorities for implementation.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- PROspective Prostate Cancer Infrastructure: study protocol for the ProPCI 'trials within cohorts' study.BMJ open · 2026Observational
- Can chatGPT-4o reliably standardize PSMA PET/CT and PET/MRI reports using PROMISE V2 criteria? - An exploratory study.EJNMMI research · 2026Article
- Article
- Re: Daniela E. Oprea-Lagera, Tessa van Elst, Shafak Aluwini, et al. How Does Routine Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Modify the Current Management of Prostate Cancer? A Multidisciplinary View. Eur Urol Open Sci 2025; 75: 69-79.European urology open science · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) and new treatment modalities have expanded the possibilities for diagnosing and managing metastatic prostate cancer, but have also raised questions about their implementation in daily clinical practice. We sought consensus on definitions, preferred imaging modality for staging, and treatment selection in the era of next-generation imaging. Methods: A modified Delphi method involved two voting rounds and a face-to-face multidisciplinary meeting with 40 Dutch prostate cancer (PCa) experts. Consensus was reached if ≥75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND Corporation/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness method. Key findings and limitations: There was consensus on performing metastatic screening with PSMA-PET/CT for unfavourable intermediate- or high-risk PCa. PSMA-PET/CT findings were considered feasible for determining treatment in synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, but there was no agreement on the validity of the CHAARTED criteria for interpreting the PSMA-PET/CT findings. If the PSMA-PET/CT findings led to upstaging after conventional imaging, 76% of panellists would opt for treatment intensification. In case of downstaging, 71% would choose for deintensification. Panellists would generally treat patients based on metastatic disease volume as per the CHAARTED criteria, except for bulky low-volume disease (LVD) and LVD with multiple (more than ten) bone metastases, all within the axial skeleton. This would be classified as LVD but treated as high-volume disease. Limitations are that the statements are largely consensus based and originate from a national (Dutch) perspective. Conclusions and clinical implications: PSMA-PET/CT was considered the preferred modality for initial PCa staging, which is nowadays the standard of care in The Netherlands. The majority of panellists would incorporate PSMA-PET/CT findings for treatment planning, including intensification and deintensification, but the criteria for interpreting metastatic disease volume on PSMA-PET/CT are still uncertain. Patient summary: A group of Dutch medical specialists discussed on how to diagnose metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and choose the most appropriate treatment for patients with this condition. It was concluded that imaging based on Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) helps determine appropriate treatment options, with most experts supporting treatment adjustments based on PSMA-PET/computed tomography (CT) results. However, there is still some uncertainty about the criteria for interpreting the extent of metastatic disease with PSMA-PET/CT.
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.