MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4243844195 · doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000555569.70342.60

PD17-09 PROSTATE-SPECIFIC MEMBRANE ANTIGEN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY (PSMA-PET) IN HIGH-RISK NONMETASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER (NMCRPC) SPARTAN-LIKE PATIENTS (PTS) NEGATIVE BY CONVENTIONAL IMAGING

2019· article· en· W4243844195 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Boris Hadaschik, Manuel Weber, Amir Iravani, Michael S. Hofman, Jérémie Calais, Johannes Czernin, Harun Ilhan, Fred Saad, Eric J. Small, Matthew R. Smith, Paola M. Perez, Thomas A. Hope, Isabel Rauscher, Anil Londhe, Angela Lopez‐Gitlitz, Shinta Cheng, Tobias Maurer, Ken Herrmann, Matthias Eiber, Wolfgang P. Fendler

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Urology · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineProstate cancerPositron emission tomographyProstateCancerCastrationOncologyUrologyInternal medicineNuclear medicineHormone

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Staging II (PD17)1 Apr 2019PD17-09 PROSTATE-SPECIFIC MEMBRANE ANTIGEN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY (PSMA-PET) IN HIGH-RISK NONMETASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER (NMCRPC) SPARTAN-LIKE PATIENTS (PTS) NEGATIVE BY CONVENTIONAL IMAGING Boris Hadaschik*, Manuel Weber, Amir Iravani, Michael S. Hofman, Jérémie Calais, Johannes Czernin, Harun Ilhan, Fred Saad, Eric J. Small, Matthew R. Smith, Paola M. Perez, Thomas A. Hope, Isabel Rauscher, Anil Londhe, Angela Lopez-Gitlitz, Shinta Cheng, Tobias Maurer, Ken Herrmann, Matthias Eiber, and Wolfgang Fendler Boris Hadaschik*Boris Hadaschik* More articles by this author , Manuel WeberManuel Weber More articles by this author , Amir IravaniAmir Iravani More articles by this author , Michael S. HofmanMichael S. Hofman More articles by this author , Jérémie CalaisJérémie Calais More articles by this author , Johannes CzerninJohannes Czernin More articles by this author , Harun IlhanHarun Ilhan More articles by this author , Fred SaadFred Saad More articles by this author , Eric J. SmallEric J. Small More articles by this author , Matthew R. SmithMatthew R. Smith More articles by this author , Paola M. PerezPaola M. Perez More articles by this author , Thomas A. HopeThomas A. Hope More articles by this author , Isabel RauscherIsabel Rauscher More articles by this author , Anil LondheAnil Londhe More articles by this author , Angela Lopez-GitlitzAngela Lopez-Gitlitz More articles by this author , Shinta ChengShinta Cheng More articles by this author , Tobias MaurerTobias Maurer More articles by this author , Ken HerrmannKen Herrmann More articles by this author , Matthias EiberMatthias Eiber More articles by this author , and Wolfgang FendlerWolfgang Fendler More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000555569.70342.60AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In SPARTAN, pts with nmCRPC assessed by conventional imaging benefited from apalutamide (APA). PSMA-PET detects localized and metastatic PC with superior sensitivity to conventional imaging. We retrospectively characterized the extent of disease using PSMA-PET in SPARTAN-like pts and compared the risk factors for M1 disease detected by PSMA-PET to those in SPARTAN. METHODS: A total of 200 pts with nmCRPC at high risk of developing metastases (prostate-specific antigen doubling time [PSADT] ≤ 10 mo, or Gleason score ≥ 8) and no known extrapelvic metastases on prior conventional imaging were assessed with PSMA-PET. Detection rate on PSMA-PET, including local/pelvic and distant M1 disease, was determined. Association of baseline (BL) variables with M1 disease in the PSMA-PET cohort was assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses. SPARTAN pts were stratified according to risk factors for PSMA-PET-detected M1 disease and analyzed using Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: BL characteristics of PSMA-PET and SPARTAN pts were generally similar. PSMA-PET detected PC in 196/200 (98%) pts; 55% had local recurrence, 54% had pelvic nodes (N1), 55% had any extrapelvic distant metastatic disease despite negative conventional imaging; 24% were diagnosed with local recurrence only, 29% with oligometastatic (1-3 lesions) and 46% with polymetastatic disease. PSA ≥ 5.5 ng/mL, pN1 disease, and prior local therapy were significantly associated with M1 disease detected by PSMA-PET (Table). All clinically relevant subgroups of SPARTAN pts, including pts with independent predictors of PSMA-PET-M1 disease, significantly benefited from APA (Table). CONCLUSIONS: PSMA-PET-positive CRPC pts were similar to those at high-risk of developing metastases in SPARTAN. APA showed significant benefit in all clinically relevant subgroups of SPARTAN pts, including pts with risk factors for distant metastases detected by PSMA-PET. Therefore, APA should be considered for pts negative by conventional imaging but positive by PSMA-PET (stage migration). The added value of PSMA-PET over PSADT in pts with high-risk nmCRPC should be explored in prospective studies. Source of Funding: Janssen Research & Development: SPARTAN. Participating centers: PSMA-PET. Essen, Germany; Melbourne, Australia; Los Angeles, CA; Munich, Germany; Montréal, Canada; San Francisco, CA; Boston, MA; San Francisco, CA; Munich, Germany; Titusville, NJ; Los Angeles, CA; Raritan, NJ; Munich, Germany; Essen, Germany; Munich, Germany; Essen, Germany© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e309-e309 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Boris Hadaschik* More articles by this author Manuel Weber More articles by this author Amir Iravani More articles by this author Michael S. Hofman More articles by this author Jérémie Calais More articles by this author Johannes Czernin More articles by this author Harun Ilhan More articles by this author Fred Saad More articles by this author Eric J. Small More articles by this author Matthew R. Smith More articles by this author Paola M. Perez More articles by this author Thomas A. Hope More articles by this author Isabel Rauscher More articles by this author Anil Londhe More articles by this author Angela Lopez-Gitlitz More articles by this author Shinta Cheng More articles by this author Tobias Maurer More articles by this author Ken Herrmann More articles by this author Matthias Eiber More articles by this author Wolfgang Fendler More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,010

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,256 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of Urology→Même sujetProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→Travaux en français237 207→