Discordance between prostate MRI and PSMA-PET/CT: the next big challenge for primary prostate tumor assessment?

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
European Radiology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1007/s00330-025-11358-x
Sungmin Woo, Anton S Becker, Doris Leithner, Marius E Mayerhoefer, Kent P Friedman, Angela Tong, David R Wise, Samir S Taneja, Michael J Zelefsky, Hebert A Vargas
{"title":"Discordance between prostate MRI and PSMA-PET/CT: the next big challenge for primary prostate tumor assessment?","authors":"Sungmin Woo, Anton S Becker, Doris Leithner, Marius E Mayerhoefer, Kent P Friedman, Angela Tong, David R Wise, Samir S Taneja, Michael J Zelefsky, Hebert A Vargas","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11358-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>An increasing number of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergo assessment with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT). This offers comprehensive multimodality staging but can lead to discrepancies. The objective was to assess the rates and types of discordance between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT for primary PCa assessment.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Consecutive men diagnosed with intermediate and high-risk PCa who underwent MRI and PSMA-PET/CT in 2021-2023 were retrospectively included. MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were interpreted using PI-RADS v2.1 and PRIMARY scores. Discordances between the two imaging modalities were categorized as \"minor\" (larger or additional lesion seen on one modality) or \"major\" (positive on only one modality or different index lesions between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT) and reconciled using radical prostatectomy or biopsy specimens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred and nine men (median age 69 years, interquartile range (IQR) 64-75) were included. Most had Gleason Grade Group ≥ 3 PCa (70.9% (219/309)). Median PSA was 9.0 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-13.6). MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were concordant in 157/309 (50.8%) and discordant in 152/309 (49.1%) patients; with 39/152 (25.7%) major and 113/152 (74.3%) minor discordances. Of 27 patients with lesions only seen on MRI, 85.2% (23/27) were clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Of 23 patients with lesions only seen on PSMA-PET/CT, 78.3% (18/23) were csPCa. Altogether, lesions seen on only one modality were csPCa in 80.0% (36/45).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in half of patients for primary PCa evaluation, with major discrepancies seen in roughly one out of eight patients.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question While both MRI and PSMA-PET/CT can be used for primary tumor assessment, the discordances between them are not well established. Findings MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in about half of the patients. Most prostate lesions seen on only one modality were significant cancer. Clinical relevance MRI and PSMA-PET/CT are often discordant for assessing the primary prostate tumor. Using both modalities for primary prostate tumor evaluation can provide complementary information that may substantially impact treatment planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"4043-4054"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11358-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: An increasing number of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) undergo assessment with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT). This offers comprehensive multimodality staging but can lead to discrepancies. The objective was to assess the rates and types of discordance between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT for primary PCa assessment.

Materials and methods: Consecutive men diagnosed with intermediate and high-risk PCa who underwent MRI and PSMA-PET/CT in 2021-2023 were retrospectively included. MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were interpreted using PI-RADS v2.1 and PRIMARY scores. Discordances between the two imaging modalities were categorized as "minor" (larger or additional lesion seen on one modality) or "major" (positive on only one modality or different index lesions between MRI and PSMA-PET/CT) and reconciled using radical prostatectomy or biopsy specimens.

Results: Three hundred and nine men (median age 69 years, interquartile range (IQR) 64-75) were included. Most had Gleason Grade Group ≥ 3 PCa (70.9% (219/309)). Median PSA was 9.0 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-13.6). MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were concordant in 157/309 (50.8%) and discordant in 152/309 (49.1%) patients; with 39/152 (25.7%) major and 113/152 (74.3%) minor discordances. Of 27 patients with lesions only seen on MRI, 85.2% (23/27) were clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Of 23 patients with lesions only seen on PSMA-PET/CT, 78.3% (18/23) were csPCa. Altogether, lesions seen on only one modality were csPCa in 80.0% (36/45).

Conclusion: MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in half of patients for primary PCa evaluation, with major discrepancies seen in roughly one out of eight patients.

Key points: Question While both MRI and PSMA-PET/CT can be used for primary tumor assessment, the discordances between them are not well established. Findings MRI and PSMA-PET/CT were discordant in about half of the patients. Most prostate lesions seen on only one modality were significant cancer. Clinical relevance MRI and PSMA-PET/CT are often discordant for assessing the primary prostate tumor. Using both modalities for primary prostate tumor evaluation can provide complementary information that may substantially impact treatment planning.

前列腺MRI与PSMA-PET/CT之间的不一致:原发性前列腺肿瘤评估的下一个重大挑战?
目的:越来越多的前列腺癌(PCa)患者接受磁共振成像(MRI)和前列腺特异性膜抗原正电子发射断层扫描/计算机断层扫描(PSMA-PET/CT)的评估。这提供了全面的多模式分期,但可能导致差异。目的是评估MRI和PSMA-PET/CT在原发性前列腺癌评估中的不一致率和类型。材料和方法:回顾性纳入在2021-2023年间连续接受MRI和PSMA-PET/CT检查诊断为中高危PCa的男性。MRI和PSMA-PET/CT采用PI-RADS v2.1和PRIMARY评分进行解释。两种成像模式之间的不一致被分类为“轻微”(在一种模式上看到更大或额外的病变)或“主要”(MRI和PSMA-PET/CT之间只有一种模式呈阳性或不同指数病变),并通过根治性前列腺切除术或活检标本进行调和。结果:纳入309名男性(中位年龄69岁,四分位数范围64-75)。多数为Gleason分级组≥3 PCa(70.9%(219/309))。中位PSA为9.0 ng/mL (IQR 5.6-13.6)。MRI与PSMA-PET/CT在157/309(50.8%)患者中一致,在152/309(49.1%)患者中不一致;39/152例(25.7%)严重不协调,113/152例(74.3%)轻微不协调。27例仅在MRI上可见病变的患者中,85.2%(23/27)为临床显著的PCa (csPCa)。23例仅在PSMA-PET/CT上可见病变的患者中,78.3%(18/23)为csPCa。总的来说,只有一种形态的病变为csPCa,占80.0%(36/45)。结论:MRI和PSMA-PET/CT在一半患者的原发性PCa评估中不一致,大约八分之一的患者出现重大差异。虽然MRI和PSMA-PET/CT都可以用于原发肿瘤的评估,但它们之间的不一致性尚未得到很好的证实。结果约半数患者MRI与PSMA-PET/CT不一致。大多数前列腺病变仅在一种模式下可见是显著的癌症。临床相关性MRI和PSMA-PET/CT在评估原发性前列腺肿瘤时往往不一致。使用这两种方式进行原发性前列腺肿瘤评估可以提供补充信息,可能会对治疗计划产生实质性影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信