English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

PET using radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is now being more widely adopted as a valuable tool to evaluate patients with prostate cancer (PC). Recently, 3 different criteria for interpretation of PSMA PET were published: the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) criteria, the Prostate Cancer Molecular Imaging Standardized Evaluation criteria, and the PSMA Reporting and Data System. We compared these 3 criteria in terms of interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement. Methods: Data from 104 patients prospectively enrolled in research protocols at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. The cohort consisted of 2 groups: 47 patients (mean age, 64.2 y old) who underwent Glu-NH-CO-NH-Lys-(Ahx)-[ 68 Ga(HBED-CC)] ( 68 Ga-PSMA11) PET/MRI for initial staging of biopsy-proven intermediate- or high-risk PC, and 57 patients (mean age, 70.5 y old) who underwent 68 Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT because of biochemically recurrent PC. Three nuclear medicine physicians independently evaluated all 68 Ga-PSMA11 PET/MRI and PET/CT studies according to the 3 interpretation criteria. Two of them reevaluated all studies 6 mo later in the same manner and masked to the initial reading. The Gwet agreement coefficient was calculated to evaluate interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement based on the following sites: local lesion (primary tumor or prostate bed after radical prostatectomy), lymph node metastases, and other metastases. Results: In the PET/MRI group, interreader, intrareader, and intercriteria agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. In the PET/CT group, interreader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect except for judgment of distant metastases based on the PSMA Reporting and Data System (Gwet agreement coefficient, 0.57; moderate agreement), in which the most frequent cause of disagreement was lung nodules. Intrareader agreement ranged from substantial to almost perfect for any site according to all 3 criteria. Intercriteria agreement for each site was also substantial to almost perfect. Conclusion: Although the 3 published criteria have good interreader and intrareader reproducibility in evaluating 68 Ga-PSMA11 PET, there are some factors causing interreader disagreement. Further work is needed to address this issue.

Comparison of 3 Interpretation Criteria for 68Ga-PSMA11 PET Based on Inter- and Intrareader Agreement

Comparison of 3 Interpretation Criteria for ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA11 PET Based on Inter- and Intrareader Agreement