CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of helical computerized tomography, positron emission tomography and monoclonal antibody scans for evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with prostate specific antigen relapse after treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Journal of Urology 1999 October
PURPOSE: We compare the detection of metastatic disease by helical computerized tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET) with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose and monoclonal antibody scan with 111indium capromab pendetide in patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) after treatment for localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 45 patients with an elevated PSA (median 3.8 ng./ml.) were studied following definitive local therapy with radical prostatectomy in 33, radiation therapy in 9 and cryosurgery in 3. CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and whole body PET were performed in all patients, of whom 21 also underwent monoclonal antibody scan. Lymph nodes 1 cm. in diameter or greater on CT were considered abnormal and were sampled by fine needle aspiration in 12 patients.

RESULTS: PET and CT were positive for distant disease in 50% of 22 patients with PSA greater than 4, and in 4 and 17%, respectively, of 23 with PSA less than 4 ng./ml. The detection rate for metastatic disease was similar for CT and PET, and higher overall than that for monoclonal antibody scan. Monoclonal antibody scan was true positive in only 1 of 6 patients, while PET was true positive in 6 of 9 with CT guided fine needle aspiration proved metastases.

CONCLUSIONS: CT and PET each detected evidence of metastatic disease in 50% of all patients with a high PSA or PSA velocity (greater than 4 ng./ml. or greater than 0.2 ng./ml. per month, respectively). Both techniques are limited for detecting metastatic disease in patients with a low PSA or PSA velocity. Our data suggest that monoclonal antibody scan has a lower detection rate than CT or PET.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app