Skip to main content
Log in

Structured reporting in prostate cancer: the revolution of quality in nuclear medicine scan interpretation

  • Commentary
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Article was published on 25 August 2023

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Grawe F, Blom F, Winkelmann M, et al (2023) Reliability and practicability of PSMA-RADS 1.0 for structured reporting of PSMA-PET/CT scans in prostate cancer patients. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10083-7

  2. Dondi F, Lazzarato A, Gorica J et al (2023) PET criteria by cancer type from imaging interpretation to treatment response assessment: beyond FDG PET score. Life (Basel) 13:611

  3. Leung KH, Rowe SP, Leal JP et al (2022) Deep learning and radiomics framework for PSMA-RADS classification of prostate cancer on PSMA PET. EJNMMI Res 12(1):76

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Letang A, Crombé A, Rousseau C et al (2022) Bone uptake in prostate cancer patients: diagnostic performances of PSMA-RADS v1.0, clinical, biological, and 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET features to predict metastasis after biochemical recurrence. Clin Nucl Med 47(8):e529–e539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuten J, Dekalo S, Mintz I et al (2021) The significance of equivocal bone findings in staging PSMA imaging in the preoperative setting: validation of the PSMA-RADS version 1.0. EJNMMI Res 11(1):3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Bhoil A, Seshadri N, Vinjamuri S (2022) Indeterminate skeletal and lymph node lesion on 18F PSMA 1007 PET/CT scanning: lessons from a review at 12 months with PSMA-RADS. Nucl Med Commun. 43(9):1034–1041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiu LW, Lawhn-Heath C, Behr SC et al (2020) Factors predicting metastatic disease in 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-positive osseous lesions in prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 61(12):1779–1785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rowe SP, Li X, Trock BJ et al (2020) Prospective comparison of PET imaging with PSMA-targeted 18F-DCFPyL versus Na18F for bone lesion detection in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 61(2):183–188

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Evangelista.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Laura Evangelista.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was not required because this is an editorial.

Study subjects or cohorts overlap

Not applicable

Methodology

• commentary

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This comment refers to the article available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10083-7.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Evangelista, L., Filippi, L. Structured reporting in prostate cancer: the revolution of quality in nuclear medicine scan interpretation. Eur Radiol 34, 1155–1156 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10507-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10507-4

Navigation