SynthesisClinical nuclear medicine2026
Comparative Detection Performance of PSMA and Non-PSMA PET Tracers in Recurrent and Primary Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical nuclear medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeProstate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted positron emission tomography (PET) tracers have reshaped prostate cancer (PC) imaging, supplementing non-PSMA options such as choline-based agents. However, direct comparative performance data across tracers remain scarce, leaving the optimal choice uncertain. We therefore conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess detection rates (DRs) among PET tracers used for primary and biochemically recurrent PC.
methodsFollowing PRISMA-NMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov through March 2025 for studies comparing 2 PET tracers for prostate cancer. The primary outcome was DR, defined as the proportion of PET-positive patients or lesions. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study design, patient demographics, and imaging parameters, and evaluated quality with QUADAS-2. We performed frequentist random-effects NMA to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs, using 68 Ga-PSMA-11 as reference.
resultsNineteen studies (1681 patients) addressed biochemical recurrence, and 6 (271 patients) targeted primary PC, with 2 overlapping. Risk of bias was low for most domains, though some uncertainty remained for reference standards and timing. In biochemically recurrent PC, PSMA-directed tracers achieved higher DRs than non-PSMA probes. Within the PSMA tracers, 64 Cu-PSMA-617 achieved the highest estimated DR, followed by 18 F-DCFPyL, 18 F-PSMA-1007, and 68 Ga-PSMA-11. Both 18 F-PSMA-1007 and 18 F-DCFPyL showed higher DRs than 68 Ga-PSMA-11 in primary and recurrent PC.
conclusionsPSMA tracers outperform non-PSMA alternatives for detecting biochemical recurrence. Among PSMA tracers, 18 F-labeled agents consistently surpass 68 Ga-PSMA-11 in both biochemically recurrent and primary PC. When available, 18 F-labeled PSMA tracers should be preferred.
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.