Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41964062›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2026

[¹⁸F]PSMA-1007 and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a prospective head-to-head comparison and assessment of PSMA-targeted radioligand therapy applicability.

Tatiana Nikolaevna Lazutina, Aleksandr Igorevich Khalimon, Soslan Rolanovich Urtaev, Malika Maratovna Khodzhibekova, Daria Yurevna Khodakova, Gulnara Faridovna Khamadeeva, Anastasia Igorevna Nikiforuk, Irina Valentinovna Pylova, Aleksei Victorovich Leontev, Andrey Dmitrievich Kaprin

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Tatiana Nikolaevna LazutinaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7835-4939
Aleksandr Igorevich KhalimonDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8905-4202
Soslan Rolanovich UrtaevDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia. urton1337@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4231-5604
Malika Maratovna KhodzhibekovaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2172-5778
Daria Yurevna KhodakovaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-2920-0328
Gulnara Faridovna KhamadeevaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4864-0643
Anastasia Igorevna NikiforukDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-2161-6232
Irina Valentinovna PylovaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1280-620X
Aleksei Victorovich LeontevDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4282-0192
Andrey Dmitrievich KaprinDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Moscow Oncology Research Institute, FSBI "National Medical Research Radiological Centre" of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8784-8415

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTriple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive molecular subtype of breast cancer with limited treatment approaches. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), widely applied as a target for molecular imaging and radioligand therapy of prostate cancer, demonstrates the highest expression in TNBC across all molecular subtypes of breast cancer, and represents a promising target for imaging and treatment of TNBC patients.

methodsThis prospective study included 20 patients with metastatic TNBC who underwent both [¹⁸F]PSMA-1007 and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT. Qualitative and quantitative image analysis was performed to determine the uptake predominance of one of the tracers and the added value of the diagnostic CT, as well as to assess the potential applicability of PSMA-targeted radioligand therapy (PSMA-RLT).

resultsA total of 229 lesions were identified using both [¹⁸F]PSMA-1007 and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT. Concordant and discordant lesions were observed for both tracers, with a greater number of discordant lesions identified by [¹⁸F]PSMA-1007. [¹⁸F]FDG demonstrated higher uptake in TNBC lesions. An exception was observed in lung lesions, where no significant difference was found between tracers. The application of diagnostic CT revealed additional TNBC lesions that were not identified by PET, for each tracer. None of the patients demonstrated a [¹⁸F]PSMA-1007 uptake level sufficient for potential PSMA-RLT application when a lesional SUV-based threshold was used.

conclusionDespite detectable [¹⁸F]PSMA-1007 uptake in TNBC lesions, [¹⁸F]FDG uptake was generally higher. Furthermore, the diagnostic CT can identify additional PET-negative lesions. Although PSMA expression is confirmed in TNBC, it may be insufficient to provide potential benefit from PSMA-RLT for this patient group.

Indexed as

Antigens, SurfaceFluorodeoxyglucose F18Glutamate Carboxypeptidase IINiacinamideOligopeptidesPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleFluorine RadioisotopesHumansMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAntigens, SurfaceFluorine RadioisotopesFluorodeoxyglucose F18FOLH1 protein, humanGlutamate Carboxypeptidase IINiacinamideOligopeptidesPSMA-1007Radiopharmaceuticals[18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose[18F]PSMA-1007PET/CTPSMA-targeted radioligand therapyTriple-negative breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID41964062
PMCPMC13217786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.