Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

How Does Routine Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Modify the Current Management of Prostate Cancer? A Multidisciplinary View

  • Daniela E. Oprea-Lager*
  • , Tessa van Elst
  • , Shafak Aluwini
  • , Els Dewulf
  • , Henk van der Poel
  • , Herman Stoevelaar
  • , Chris H. Bangma
  • , Aart Beeker
  • , Steve Boudewijns
  • , Tom Budiharto
  • , Igle Jan de Jong
  • , Kim C. de Vries
  • , Maarten L. Donswijk
  • , Jurgen J. Fütterer
  • , Paul Hamberg
  • , Linda Heijmen
  • , Robert J. Hoekstra
  • , Thomas M.A. Kerkhofs
  • , Jules Lavalaye
  • , Daphne Luijendijk de Bruin
  • Walter Noordzij, Irma M. Oving, Debbie G.J. Robbrecht, Eva E. Schaake, Addy C.M. van de Luijtgaarden, Roderick C.N. van den Bergh, Franchette van den Berkmortel, Tom van der Hulle, Johannes C.K. van der Mijn, Joyce M. van Dodewaard-de Jong, Michel van Kruchten, Pim J. van Leeuwen, Evert van Limbergen, R. Jeroen A. van Moorselaar, Inge M. van Oort, Joep G.H. van Roermund, Robert J. van Soest, Theo Veninga, André N. Vis, Jens Voortman, Peter Paul M. Willemse, Derya Yakar, Niven Mehra
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Amsterdam UMC
  • Radboud University Medical Center
  • Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital
  • Centre for Decision Analysis and Support
  • Netherlands Cancer Institute
  • Spaarne Gasthuis
  • Bravis Hospital
  • Catharina Hospital
  • University Medical Centre Groningen
  • Leiden University
  • Maastricht University
  • St. Antonius Ziekenhuis
  • Martini Ziekenhuis
  • Ziekenhuisgroep Twente (Almelo)
  • Reinier Haga Prostate Cancer Centre
  • Zuyderland Medical Center (Heerlen)
  • Meander Medical Center
  • Dr. Bernard Verbeeten Instituut

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
124 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background and objective: Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) and new treatment modalities have expanded the possibilities for diagnosing and managing metastatic prostate cancer, but have also raised questions about their implementation in daily clinical practice. We sought consensus on definitions, preferred imaging modality for staging, and treatment selection in the era of next-generation imaging. Methods: A modified Delphi method involved two voting rounds and a face-to-face multidisciplinary meeting with 40 Dutch prostate cancer (PCa) experts. Consensus was reached if ≥75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND Corporation/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness method. Key findings and limitations: There was consensus on performing metastatic screening with PSMA-PET/CT for unfavourable intermediate- or high-risk PCa. PSMA-PET/CT findings were considered feasible for determining treatment in synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, but there was no agreement on the validity of the CHAARTED criteria for interpreting the PSMA-PET/CT findings. If the PSMA-PET/CT findings led to upstaging after conventional imaging, 76% of panellists would opt for treatment intensification. In case of downstaging, 71% would choose for deintensification. Panellists would generally treat patients based on metastatic disease volume as per the CHAARTED criteria, except for bulky low-volume disease (LVD) and LVD with multiple (more than ten) bone metastases, all within the axial skeleton. This would be classified as LVD but treated as high-volume disease. Limitations are that the statements are largely consensus based and originate from a national (Dutch) perspective. Conclusions and clinical implications: PSMA-PET/CT was considered the preferred modality for initial PCa staging, which is nowadays the standard of care in The Netherlands. The majority of panellists would incorporate PSMA-PET/CT findings for treatment planning, including intensification and deintensification, but the criteria for interpreting metastatic disease volume on PSMA-PET/CT are still uncertain. Patient summary: A group of Dutch medical specialists discussed on how to diagnose metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and choose the most appropriate treatment for patients with this condition. It was concluded that imaging based on Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) helps determine appropriate treatment options, with most experts supporting treatment adjustments based on PSMA-PET/computed tomography (CT) results. However, there is still some uncertainty about the criteria for interpreting the extent of metastatic disease with PSMA-PET/CT.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)69-79
Number of pages11
JournalEuropean Urology Open Science
Volume75
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How Does Routine Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Modify the Current Management of Prostate Cancer? A Multidisciplinary View'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this