ReviewWorld journal of urology2026
Bridging the PSMA PET/CT access gap in prostate cancer: evidence, barriers, and priorities for implementation.
Review in World journal of urology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine the gap between evidence-based indications for PSMA PET/CT and real-world access in prostate cancer, with a focus on European implementation and country-specific experience from Spain and France.
methodsA focused narrative appraisal of published evidence, clinical guidelines, regulatory and reimbursement information, and real-world accessibility data was performed. European accessibility modelling and physician market research from Spain were incorporated to characterise implementation patterns and barriers.
resultsAccess to PSMA PET/CT remains heterogeneous despite its established role in higher-risk staging and biochemical recurrence. Reported barriers include reimbursement and local approval requirements, PET/CT and nuclear medicine capacity, radiopharmaceutical logistics, non-standardised referral pathways, waiting times, and institutional variation. Exploratory modelling suggested that use remains below the estimated eligible population in both staging and biochemical recurrence, with differences between countries and clinical scenarios. Spanish market research similarly indicated substantial variation. These data are exploratory implementation signals rather than population-level epidemiological estimates.
conclusionImproving access requires guideline-based eligibility criteria, harmonised reimbursement, regional referral networks, adequate imaging and reporting capacity, reliable tracer supply, and measurable access indicators. Further research should determine whether reducing implementation gaps improves diagnostic pathways and treatment allocation.
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.