Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41204951›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026

Diagnostic performance of PSMA PET/CT, multiparametric MRI, and combined imaging for local prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Michael Phillipi, David Choung, Erwin Ho, Samuel Anavim, Shayan Saeed, Chang Shu, James Shi, Justin Glavis-Bloom, Arti Gupta, Akash Joshi and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Michael PhillipiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA. michael.phillipi@md.cusm.edu.
David ChoungDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Erwin HoDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Samuel AnavimDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Shayan SaeedDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Chang ShuDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
James ShiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Justin Glavis-BloomDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Arti GuptaDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Akash JoshiDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Amir ImanzadehDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Steven SeyedinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Edward UchioDepartment of Urology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Michael DaneshvarDepartment of Urology, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Roozbeh HoushyarDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesApproximately 20-50% of patients develop biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer within 10 years following radical prostatectomy (RP). The accurate identification of recurrent disease is crucial for guiding salvage treatment decisions. While multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) are both utilized for detecting local recurrence, their combined diagnostic benefits remain unclear. This study seeks to evaluate the diagnostic performance of both modalities alone and in conjunction for detecting local recurrence following RP in patients with BCR.

methodsA retrospective single-institution analysis included 37 post-RP patients with BCR who received mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT. Five board-certified radiologists reviewed images in three phases: mpMRI only, PSMA PET/CT only, and both modalities combined. Multidisciplinary tumor board consensus served as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance, inter-reader agreement, and radiologist confidence with each modality was examined.

resultsMpMRI outperformed PSMA PET/CT, yielding a higher sensitivity (73.0% vs. 65.2%) and specificity (77.1% vs. 75.7%). Interpretation of mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT together achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy (77.8%), representing a statistically-significant increase over PSMA PET/CT (p = 0.026) but a non-statistically-significant increase over mpMRI (p = 0.441). Combined imaging also resulted in greater specificity (90.0%) and inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.622). However, in some cases performance decreased with both modalities due to interpretive pitfalls.

conclusionWhile mpMRI remains the preferred imaging modality for post-RP local recurrence surveillance, the integration of PSMA PET/CT may lead to improved specificity and inter-rater reliability. However, radiologists must understand each modality's limitations to avoid interpretive pitfalls.

Indexed as

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProstatic NeoplasmsAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingProstatectomyRadiopharmaceuticalsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityRadiopharmaceuticalsLocal recurrenceMultiparametric MRIProstate cancerProstatectomyPSMA PET/CT

Identifiers

PMID41204951
PMCPMC13109148

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.