Prediction nomogram for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in different clinical settings of PSA failure after radical treatment for prostate cancer

[1] Kattan MW(1999)Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 17 1499-1507

[2] Wheeler TM(2015)Metastasis-directed therapy of regional and distant recurrences after curative treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature Eur Urol 67 852-863

[3] Scardino PT(2017)Toward the future of the functional imaging of advanced prostate cancer Eur Urol Focus 3 240-242

[4] Ost P(2015)Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy J Nucl Med 56 1185-1190

[5] Bossi A(2014)Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41 11-20

[6] Decaestecker K(2017)Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44 92-101

[7] Schiavina R(2018)Comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-fluciclovine PET/CT in a case series of 10 patients with prostate cancer recurrence J Nucl Med 59 789-794

[8] Bianchi L(2019)18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial The Lancet Oncology 20 1286-1294

[9] Borghesi M(2015)Evaluation of hybrid J Nucl Med 56 668-674

[10] Sabbatini R(2019)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46 31-39

[1] Kattan MW(1999)Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 17 1499-1507

[2] Wheeler TM(2015)Metastasis-directed therapy of regional and distant recurrences after curative treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature Eur Urol 67 852-863

[3] Scardino PT(2017)Toward the future of the functional imaging of advanced prostate cancer Eur Urol Focus 3 240-242

[4] Ost P(2015)Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy J Nucl Med 56 1185-1190

[5] Bossi A(2014)Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41 11-20

[6] Decaestecker K(2017)Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44 92-101

[7] Schiavina R(2018)Comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-fluciclovine PET/CT in a case series of 10 patients with prostate cancer recurrence J Nucl Med 59 789-794

[8] Bianchi L(2019)18F-fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial The Lancet Oncology 20 1286-1294

[9] Borghesi M(2015)Evaluation of hybrid J Nucl Med 56 668-674

[10] Sabbatini R(2019)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46 31-39