Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41207904›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

[

Mutaz Kassas, Louise Devriendt, Martin Manley, Thomas Guiot, Clementine Marin, Rachele Danieli, Loubna Taraji, Paulus Kristanto, Ioannis Karfis, Erwin Woff and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

12 authors.

Mutaz KassasDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Louise DevriendtFaculté de Médecine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Martin ManleyDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Thomas GuiotDepartment of Medical Physics, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Clementine MarinDepartment of Medical Physics, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Rachele DanieliDepartment of Medical Physics, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Loubna TarajiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Paulus KristantoData Centre, Unité de Gestion de L'Information, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Ioannis KarfisDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Erwin WoffDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Patrick FlamenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium.
Carlos ArtigasDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Rue Meylemeersch 90, Brussels, 1070, Belgium. carlos.artigas@hubruxelles.be.ORCID 0000-0001-6421-0064

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study evaluates the prognostic value of early response assessment using the Response Evaluation Criteria in PSMA imaging (RECIP 1.0) applied to 24-hour post-therapy SPECT/CT at the second cycle of lutetium-177 (

methodsThis analysis included 136 metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with ≥ 2 cycles of [

resultsAfter a median follow-up of 23 months, median PSA-PFS was 6.4 months and median OS was 16.6 months. Regarding imaging parameters, increase in SUVmean (HR = 1.02, p < 0.001), TTV increase ≥ 20% (HR = 3.5, p < 0.001) and appearance of new lesions (NL) (HR = 2.6, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with shorter PSA-PFS, while only TTV increase ≥ 20% (HR = 1.8, p = 0.023) and NLs (HR = 2.3, p = 0.0016) were associated with OS. The combination of both categories using RECIP 1.0 demonstrated that RECIP-PD patients (n = 16/136) had significantly reduced median PSA-PFS (HR = 3.6, p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 3.1, p < 0.001) compared to RECIP-non-PD. The most consistent prognostic accuracy was achieved using RECIP 1.0 (Harrell's C-index: PSA-PFS = 0.80, OS = 0.78).

conclusionOur study demonstrates that quantitative RECIP 1.0 applied on C2 [

Indexed as

Glutamate Carboxypeptidase IILutetiumProstatic Neoplasms, Castration-ResistantSingle Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed TomographyAgedAged, 80 and overAntigens, SurfaceHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProstate-Specific AntigenRadioisotopesRadiopharmaceuticalsTreatment OutcomeAntigens, SurfaceFOLH1 protein, humanGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IILutetiumLutetium-177PluvictoProstate-Specific AntigenRadioisotopesRadiopharmaceuticalsLu-PSMAPrognosticRECIPResponseSPECT

Identifiers

PMID41207904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.