Diagnostic values of different diagnostic criteria of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT for primary prostate cancer
10.3760/cma.j.cn321828-20220531-00180
- VernacularTitle:18F-DCFPyL PET/CT的不同诊断标准对前列腺癌原发病灶的诊断价值
- Author:
Le MA
1
;
Wanchun ZHANG
;
Luoping ZHAI
;
Yaxin HAO
Author Information
1. 山西白求恩医院（山西医学科学院 同济山西医院），山西医科大学第三医院核医学科，太原 030032
- Keywords:
Prostatic neoplasms;
Prostate-specific membrane antigen;
Urea;
Positron-emission tomography;
Tomography, X-ray computed;
Diagnosis, differential
- From:
Chinese Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
2022;42(12):734-738
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the diagnostic values of different diagnostic criteria of prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT for primary prostate cancer (PCa).Methods:From May 2019 to May 2021, 2-(3-(1-carboxy-5-((6- 18F-fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino)-pentyl)-ureido)-pentanedioic acid ( 18F-DCFPyL) PET/CT images of 78 patients (age: (68.5±1.4) years) with clinically suspected PCa in Shanxi Bethune Hospital were retrospectively collected and blind diagnosed by the three criteria of SUV max, PSMA reporting and data system (PSMA-RADS) score and molecular imaging PSMA (miPSMA) score. The diagnostic efficacy for PCa, the correlation between the diagnostic results and disease risk, and the consistency of the diagnostic results of the three criteria were compared. Delong test, Spearman rank correlation analysis, and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to analyze data. Results:The sensitivities of SUV max, PSMA-RADS score and miPSMA score for PCa were all 93.75%(60/64) and the specificities were 12/14, 10/14 and 12/14 respectively; AUCs of the three criteria were 0.951, 0.862 and 0.951, with no significant difference between SUV max and miPSMA score ( z=0.00, P=1.000), while there were significant differences between PSMA-RADS score and SUV max or miPSMA score ( z values: 2.71, 2.93, P values: 0.007, 0.030). There were positive correlations between the diagnostic results of the three criteria and the disease risk (International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading: rs values: 0.66, 0.62, 0.63, all P<0.001; D′Amico grouping: rs values: 0.67, 0.64, 0.67, all P<0.001). The diagnostic results of the three criteria were highly consistent (ICC=0.941, 95% CI: 0.903-0.967). Conclusion:The SUV max and miPSMA score have higher diagnostic efficiency and correlation of disease risk, which are more suitable for clinical application.
