| 001 | 1038069 | ||
| 005 | 20250203133245.0 | ||
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 10.1186/s13550-024-01190-7 |2 doi |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 10.34734/FZJ-2025-01118 |2 datacite_doi |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a 39792324 |2 pmid |
| 024 | 7 | _ | |a WOS:001394361800001 |2 WOS |
| 037 | _ | _ | |a FZJ-2025-01118 |
| 082 | _ | _ | |a 610 |
| 100 | 1 | _ | |a Heilinger, Jan |0 0009-0004-0026-824X |b 0 |
| 245 | _ | _ | |a Do you know your PSMA-tracer? Variability in the biodistribution of different PSMA ligands and its potential impact on defining PSMA-positivity prior to PSMA-targeted therapy |
| 260 | _ | _ | |a Heidelberg |c 2025 |b Springer |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a article |2 DRIVER |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Output Types/Journal article |2 DataCite |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |b journal |m journal |0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16 |s 1738085103_1217 |2 PUB:(DE-HGF) |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a ARTICLE |2 BibTeX |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE |2 ORCID |
| 336 | 7 | _ | |a Journal Article |0 0 |2 EndNote |
| 520 | _ | _ | |a Background In clinical practice, several radiopharmaceuticals are used for PSMA-PET imaging, each with distinctbiodistribution patterns. This may impact treatment decisions and outcomes, as eligibility for PSMA-directedradioligand therapy is usually assessed by comparing tumoral uptake to normal liver uptake as a reference. In thisstudy, we aimed to compare tracer uptake intraindividually in various reference regions including liver, parotid glandand spleen as well as the respective tumor-to-background ratios (TBR) of different 18F-labeled PSMA ligands to today’sstandard radiopharmaceutical 68Ga-PSMA-11 in a series of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancerwho underwent a dual PSMA-PET examination as part of an individualized diagnostic approach.Results Differences in background activity among different PSMA-PET tracers lead to variations in tumor-tobackgroundratios (TBR). In [18F]F-DCFPyL-PET, TBR with the liver as the reference organ (TBRliver) was comparableto [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11-PET, while [18F]F-PSMA-1007-PET and [18F]F-JK-PSMA-7-PET showed significantly lower values.Using the parotid gland as the reference (TBRparotidgland), [18F]F-DCFPyL-PET exhibited significantly higher values,whereas [18F]F-PSMA-1007-PET and [18F]F-JK-PSMA-7-PET were comparable. For the spleen (TBRspleen), [18F]F-JK-PSMA-7-PET was comparable, but [18F]F-DCFPyL-PET and [18F]F-PSMA-1007-PET showed significantly higher and lowervalues, respectively. An additional Bland-Altman analyses revealed low bias for [18F]F-DCFPyL-PET in TBRparotidgland,whereas significant differences in TBRliver and TBRspleen for the other tracers resulted in higher bias.Conclusion Different PSMA-PET tracers exhibit distinct biodistribution patterns, leading to variations in tumor-tobackgroundratios (TBR) in reference organs such as the liver, parotid gland, and spleen. Patient selection for PSMA-directed radioligand therapy is currently based on a semiquantitative approach using the liver as a reference regionin [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11-PET. Thus, the use of alternative [18F]-labeled tracers may result in under- or overestimation of apatient’s suitability for therapy. This highlights the importance of a comprehensive understanding of the differencesin tracer-specific uptake behavior for accurate decisions regarding PSMA-expression levels. However, as the patientcohort in this study is at earlier disease stages, the generalizability of these findings to later-stage patients remainsunclear and requires further investigation. |
| 536 | _ | _ | |a 5253 - Neuroimaging (POF4-525) |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5253 |c POF4-525 |f POF IV |x 0 |
| 588 | _ | _ | |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: juser.fz-juelich.de |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Roth, Katrin Sabine |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 1 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Weis, Henning |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 2 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Fink, Antonis |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 3 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Weindler, Jasmin |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 4 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Dietlein, Felix |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 5 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Krapf, Philipp |0 P:(DE-Juel1)169356 |b 6 |u fzj |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Schomäcker, Klaus |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 7 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Neumaier, Bernd |0 P:(DE-Juel1)166419 |b 8 |u fzj |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Dietlein, Markus |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 9 |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Drzezga, Alexander |0 P:(DE-Juel1)177611 |b 10 |u fzj |
| 700 | 1 | _ | |a Kobe, Carsten |0 P:(DE-HGF)0 |b 11 |e Corresponding author |
| 773 | _ | _ | |a 10.1186/s13550-024-01190-7 |g Vol. 15, no. 1, p. 4 |0 PERI:(DE-600)2619892-7 |n 1 |p 4 |t EJNMMI Research |v 15 |y 2025 |x 2191-219X |
| 856 | 4 | _ | |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1038069/files/s13550-024-01190-7.pdf |y OpenAccess |
| 909 | C | O | |o oai:juser.fz-juelich.de:1038069 |p openaire |p open_access |p VDB |p driver |p dnbdelivery |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 6 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)169356 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 8 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)166419 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a Forschungszentrum Jülich |0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8 |k FZJ |b 10 |6 P:(DE-Juel1)177611 |
| 910 | 1 | _ | |a External Institute |0 I:(DE-HGF)0 |k Extern |b 11 |6 P:(DE-HGF)0 |
| 913 | 1 | _ | |a DE-HGF |b Key Technologies |l Natural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing |1 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520 |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525 |3 G:(DE-HGF)POF4 |2 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500 |4 G:(DE-HGF)POF |v Decoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction |9 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5253 |x 0 |
| 914 | 1 | _ | |y 2025 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200 |2 StatID |b SCOPUS |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0160 |2 StatID |b Essential Science Indicators |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 |0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4 |2 HGFVOC |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600 |2 StatID |b Ebsco Academic Search |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a JCR |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100 |2 StatID |b EJNMMI RES : 2022 |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501 |2 StatID |b DOAJ Seal |d 2024-04-10T15:38:06Z |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500 |2 StatID |b DOAJ |d 2024-04-10T15:38:06Z |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a WoS |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0113 |2 StatID |b Science Citation Index Expanded |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Fees |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0700 |2 StatID |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150 |2 StatID |b Web of Science Core Collection |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a IF < 5 |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900 |2 StatID |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a OpenAccess |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0510 |2 StatID |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Peer Review |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030 |2 StatID |b ASC |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Article Processing Charges |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0561 |2 StatID |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300 |2 StatID |b Medline |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110 |2 StatID |b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a DBCoverage |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199 |2 StatID |b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List |d 2024-12-11 |
| 915 | _ | _ | |a Peer Review |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030 |2 StatID |b DOAJ : Anonymous peer review |d 2024-04-10T15:38:06Z |
| 920 | _ | _ | |l yes |
| 920 | 1 | _ | |0 I:(DE-Juel1)INM-5-20090406 |k INM-5 |l Nuklearchemie |x 0 |
| 920 | 1 | _ | |0 I:(DE-Juel1)INM-2-20090406 |k INM-2 |l Molekulare Organisation des Gehirns |x 1 |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a journal |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a VDB |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a UNRESTRICTED |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a I:(DE-Juel1)INM-5-20090406 |
| 980 | _ | _ | |a I:(DE-Juel1)INM-2-20090406 |
| 980 | 1 | _ | |a FullTexts |
| Library | Collection | CLSMajor | CLSMinor | Language | Author |
|---|
Gast ::