The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial
Open accessAbstract
Background National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider 18F-fluciclovine PET-CT for prostate cancer biochemical recurrence localisation after radical prostatectomy, whereas European Association of Urology guidelines recommend prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET-CT. To the best of our knowledge, no prospective head-to-head comparison between these tests has been done so far. The aim of this study was to compare prospectively paired 18F-fluciclovine and PSMA PET-CT scans for localising biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy in patients with low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations (<2·0 ng/mL). Methods This was a prospective, single-centre, open-label, single-arm comparative study done at University of California Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA, USA). Patients older than 18 years of age with prostate cancer biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and PSA levels ranging from 0·2 to 2·0 ng/mL without any prior salvage therapy and with a Karnofsky performance status of at least 50 were eligible. Patients underwent 18F-fluciclovine (reference test) and PSMA (index test) PET-CT scans within 15 days. Detection rate of biochemical recurrence at the patient level and by anatomical region was the primary endpoint. A statistical power analysis demonstrated that a sample size of 50 patients was needed to show a 22% difference in detection rates in favour of PSMA (test for superiority). Each PET scan was interpreted by three independent masked readers and a consensus majority interpretation was generated (two vs one) to determine positive findings. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03515577, and is complete. Findings Between Feb 26, 2018, and Sept 20, 2018, 143 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 50 patients were enrolled into the study. Median follow-up was 8 months (IQR 7–9). The primary endpoint was met; detection rates were significantly lower with 18F-fluciclovine PET-CT (13 [26%; 95% CI 15–40] of 50) than with PSMA PET-CT (28 [56%; 41–70] of 50), with an odds ratio (OR) of 4·8 (95% CI 1·6–19·2; p=0·0026) at the patient level; in the subanalysis of the pelvic nodes region (four [8%; 2–19] with 18F-fluciclovine vs 15 [30%; 18–45] with PSMA PET-CT; OR 12·0 [1·8–513·0], p=0·0034); and in the subanalysis of any extrapelvic lesions (none [0%; 0–6] vs eight [16%; 7–29]; OR non-estimable [95% CI non-estimable], p=0·0078). Interpretation With higher detection rates, PSMA should be the PET tracer of choice when PET-CT imaging is considered for subsequent treatment management decisions in patients with prostate cancer and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and low PSA concentrations (≤2·0 ng/mL). Further research is needed to investigate whether higher detection rates translate into improved oncological outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
68Ga-PSMA PET/CT: Joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0
Fendler, W. P., Eiber, M., Beheshti, M., Bomanji, J., Ceci, F., Cho, S., Giesel, F., Haberkorn, U., Hope, T. A., Kopka, K., et al. (2017) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3670-z · Cited by 750
Self-citationEiber, M., Herrmann, K., Calais, J., Hadaschik, B., Giesel, F. L., Hartenbach, M., Hope, T., Reiter, R., Maurer, T., Weber, W. A., et al. (2018) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.198119 · Cited by 626
Self-citation
Cited by
Morris, M. J., Rowe, S. P., Gorin, M. A., Saperstein, L., Pouliot, F., Josephson, D., Wong, J. Y. C., Pantel, A. R., Cho, S. Y., Gage, K. L., et al. (2021) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-20-4573 · Cited by 389
E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET
Ceci, F., Oprea-Lager, D. E., Emmett, L., Adam, J. A., Bomanji, J., Czernin, J., Eiber, M., Haberkorn, U., Hofman, M. S., Hope, T. A., et al. (2021) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-021-05245-y · Cited by 368
Self-citationHope, T. A., Eiber, M., Armstrong, W. R., Juarez, R., Murthy, V., Lawhn-Heath, C., Behr, S. C., Zhang, L., Barbato, F., Ceci, F., et al. (2021) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3771 · Cited by 357
Self-citationFendler, W. P., Weber, M., Iravani, A., Hofman, M. S., Calais, J., Czernin, J., Ilhan, H., Saad, F., Small, E. J., Smith, M. R., et al. (2019) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-1050 · Cited by 266
Self-citationFendler, W. P., Calais, J., Eiber, M., Simko, J. P., Kurhanewicz, J., Santos, R. D., Feng, F. Y., Reiter, R. E., Rettig, M. B., Nickols, N. G., et al. (2021) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-020-04945-1 · Cited by 56
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Calais, J., Ceci, F., Eiber, M., Hope, T. A., Hofman, M. S., Rischpler, C., Bach-Gansmo, T., Nanni, C., Savir-Baruch, B., Elashoff, D., Grogan, T., Dahlbom, M., Slavik, R., Gartmann, J., Nguyen, K., Lok, V., Jadvar, H., Kishan, A. U., Rettig, M. B., Reiter, R. E., Fendler, W. P., & Czernin, J.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1286-1294
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2966792020
- Cited by
- 476
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 45.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30415-2
- The paper
- Calais, J., Ceci, F., Eiber, M., Hope, T. A., Hofman, M. S., Rischpler, C., Bach-Gansmo, T., Nanni, C., Savir-Baruch, B., Elashoff, D., Grogan, T., Dahlbom, M., Slavik, R., Gartmann, J., Nguyen, K., Lok, V., Jadvar, H., Kishan, A. U., Rettig, M. B., . . . Czernin, J. (2019). 18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30415-2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.