Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-targeted biopsy for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

. 2022 Aug ; 5 (4) : 390-400. [epub] 20220615

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko Médium print-electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, metaanalýza, přehledy, systematický přehled

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid35715320
Odkazy

PubMed 35715320
DOI 10.1016/j.euo.2022.04.006
PII: S2588-9311(22)00064-5
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

CONTEXT: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) has gained acceptance as a staging tool for prostate cancer (PCa). Recent reports suggest an association between PSMA PET and detection of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) on prostate biopsy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of PSMA PET-targeted biopsy (PSMA-PET-TB) for csPCa detection. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus in December 2021 to identify studies assessing the accuracy of PSMA-PET-TB for csPCa detection. A diagnostic meta-analysis was performed to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of PSMA-PET-TB alone and in combination with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-TB for detecting csPCa. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, five prospective studies involving 497 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. For csPCa detection, PSMA-PET-TB had pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.93), 0.56 (95% CI 0.29-0.80), 0.69 (95% CI 0.58-0.79), and 0.78 (95% CI 0.50-0.93), respectively. Among the three studies assessing the PSMA-PET + MRI-TB strategy, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for csPCa detection were 0.91 (95% CI 0.77-0.97), 0.64 (95% CI 0.40-0.82), 0.75 (95% CI 0.56-0.87), and 0.85 (95% CI 0.62-0.95), respectively. For lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 0.69, 0.73, 0.48, and 0.86, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA-PET-TB appears to have favorable diagnostic accuracy for csPCa detection and combination with MRI seems to improve this. According to our meta-analysis, PSMA-PET has promising clinical application for detection of csPCa, namely in the case of PI-RADS 3 lesions. Further prospective studies are needed to explore the true clinical utility of a PSMA-PET-based diagnostic pathway. PATIENT SUMMARY: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) is a promising imaging method for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer and seems to have additional value to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detection.

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit University of Montreal Health Centre Montreal Canada

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy Division of General and Pediatric Radiology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy Division of Nuclear Medicine Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology King Fahad Specialist Hospital Dammam Saudi Arabia

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology King Faisal Medical City Abha Saudi Arabia

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology Medical University of Silesia Zabrze Poland

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences Okayama Japan

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg University Hospital Salzburg Salzburg Austria

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology The Jikei University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Department of Urology University Medical Centre Hamburg Eppendorf Hamburg Germany

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia; Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research Al Ahliyya Amman University Amman Jordan; Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas TX USA; Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic; Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY USA; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Men's Health and Reproductive Health Research Center Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria; Research Center for Evidence Based Medicine Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz Iran

Department of Urology Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences Okayama Japan

Division of Nuclear Medicine European Institute of Oncology IRCCS Milan Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato Oncology University of Milan Milan Italy

Komentář v

PubMed

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...