The accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary lymph node staging in high-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA PET in predicting lymph node (LN) metastases in primary N staging in high-risk and very high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer in comparison with morphological imaging. METHODS: This was a multicentre trial of the Society of Urologic Oncology in Turkey in conjunction with the Nuclear Medicine Department of Cerrahpasa School of Medicine, Istanbul University. Patients were accrued from eight centres. Patients with high-risk and very high-risk disease scheduled to undergo surgical treatment with extended LN dissection between July 2014 and October 2015 were included. Either MRI or CT was used for morphological imaging. PSMA PET/CT was performed and evaluated at a single centre. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated for the detection of lymphatic metastases by PSMA PET/CT and morphological imaging. Kappa values were calculated to evaluate the correlation between the numbers of LN metastases detected by PSMA PET/CT and by histopathology. RESULTS: Data on 51 eligible patients are presented. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of PSMA PET in detecting LN metastases in the primary setting were 53%, 86% and 76%, and increased to 67%, 88% and 81% in the subgroup with of patients with ≥15 LN removed. Kappa values for the correlation between imaging and pathology were 0.41 for PSMA PET and 0.18 for morphological imaging. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA PET/CT is superior to morphological imaging for the detection of metastatic LNs in patients with primary prostate cancer. Surgical dissection remains the gold standard for precise lymphatic staging.

Patient Decision Making Prior to Radical Prostatectomy: What Is and Is Not Involved.

The current study assessed the decision-making process before surgery in prostate cancer patients. A structured telephone interview was conducted by an independent third party in 162 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for prostate cancer. Responders revealed that details regarding diagnosis and treatment alternatives were withheld from a significant number of patients. Radiation and active surveillance were presented as alternative options to surgery in 57 (39%) and 20 (14%) of responders, respectively. Twenty-six (18%) patients reported not being informed regarding potential surgical side effects. Patients were not active participants in critical aspects of decision making in 61 (42%) of the cases. Being inadequately informed and more frequent visits to the urologist appeared to make decisions more difficult. Treatment regret was reported by 23 (16%) of the patients who underwent surgery and was more common when the patient was not involved in the decision or was inadequately informed. As such, shared decision making should replace paternalism when managing patients with localized prostate cancer in urologic practice.