MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396780056 · doi:10.2967/jnumed.123.267208

Assessing Response to PSMA Radiopharmaceutical Therapies with Single SPECT Imaging at 24 Hours After Injection

2024· article· en· W4396780056 on OpenAlexaff
Surekha Yadav, Fei Jiang, Sara Kurkowska, Rachelle Saelee, A. H. Morley, Felix Y. Feng, Rahul Aggarwal, Courtney Lawhn-Heath, C. Uribe, Thomas A. Hope

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineNuclear medicineMedical physicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the relationship between lesion-absorbed dose and tumor response in 177Lu-PSMA-617 radiopharmaceutical therapies (RPTs) remains complex. We aimed to investigate whether baseline lesion-absorbed dose can predict lesion-based responses and to explore the connection between lesion-absorbed dose and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response. Methods: In this retrospective study, we evaluated 50 patients with 335 index lesions undergoing 177Lu-PSMA-617 RPT, who had dosimetry analysis performed on SPECT/CT at 24 h after cycles 1 and 2. First, we identified the index lesions for each patient and measured the lesion-based absorbed doses. Lesion-based response was calculated after cycle 2. Additionally, PSA50 response (a decline of 50% from baseline PSA) after cycle 2 was also calculated. The respective responses for mean and maximum absorbed doses and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) volumetric intensity product (VIP-PSMA) at cycles 1 and 2 were termed SPECTmean, SPECTmaximum, and SPECTVIP-PSMA, respectively. Results: Of the 50 patients reviewed, 46% achieved a PSA50 response after cycle 2. Of the 335 index lesions, 58% were osseous, 32% were lymph nodes, and 10% were soft-tissue metastatic lesions. The SPECT lesion-based responses were higher in PSA responders than in nonresponders (SPECTmean response of 46.8% ± 26.1% vs. 26.2% ± 24.5%, P = 0.007; SPECTmaximum response of 45% ± 25.1% vs. 19% ± 27.0%, P = 0.001; SPECTVIP-PSMA response of 49.2% ± 30.3% vs. 14% ± 34.7%, P = 0.0005). An association was observed between PSA response and SPECTVIP-PSMA response (R2 = 0.40 and P < 0.0001). A limited relationship was found between baseline absorbed dose measured with a 24-h single time point and SPECT lesion-based response (R2 = 0.05, P = 0.001, and R2 = 0.03, P = 0.007, for mean and maximum absorbed doses, respectively). Conclusion: In this retrospective study, quantitative lesion-based response correlated with patient-level PSA response. We observed a limited relationship between baseline absorbed dose and lesion-based responses. Most of the variance in response remains unexplained solely by baseline absorbed dose. Establishment of a dose–response relationship in RPT with a single time point at 24 h presented some limitations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear MedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207