Intraindividual Comparison of 99mTc-Methylene Diphosphonate and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand 99mTc-MIP-1427 in Patients with Osseous Metastasized Prostate Cancer
To evaluate the detection rate of bone metastases obtained with the PSMA targeting tracer 99mTc-MIP-1427 as opposed to the conventional bone scan with 99mTc-MDP in a collective of advanced stage patients with known osseous metastasized prostate cancer. Methods: 21 Patients with known metastatic disease were staged with both, conventional bone scan and PSMA-ligand scintigraphy, within a time-frame of <10 days. Imaging included planar whole-body scans and SPECT or SPECT/CT with two bed positions 3 h after injection of either 500-750 MBq 99mTc-MIP-1427 or 600-750 MBq 99mTc-MDP. Lesions were scored: typical tumor, equivocal (benign/malignant), or normal within a standard reporting schema divided into defined anatomical regions. Blind and consensus reads were performed with sequential un-blinding: first planar scans, then SPECT/CT, then best valuable comparator including MRI, PET/CT and follow-up exams. Results: 11 patients had PSMA-positive visceral metastases which were predictably not diagnosed with conventional bone scan. However, SPECT/CT was required to distinguish between soft tissue uptake and overlapping bone. 4 patients had extensive MDP negative bone marrow lesions. 7 patients had superscan character in bone scan; in contrast, extent of red marrow involvement was more evident by PSMA-scan. Only 3 patients had completely equal results in the bone-scan and PSMA-scan. Also more suspicious lesions were detected in 16 patients using PSMA-scan in comparison to bone-scan. In two patients (about 10 %) a PSMA-negative tumor phenotype was present. Conclusion: PSMA-scanning presented a clearly advantage versus bone-scans by reducing the number of equivocal findings, in most patients. SPECT/CT is pivotal to differentiate between benign (e.g. degenerative changes), bone metastases and extra-osseous tumor lesions.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
2
5%
Nursing and Health Professions
2
5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
1
2%
Other
3
7%
Unknown
19
43%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#19,467,763
of 28,932,665 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
#4,213
of 5,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#286,903
of 461,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
#40
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,932,665 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 461,349 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
