Comparing the clinical performance and cost efficacy of [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [(18)F]PSMA-1007 in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: A Markov chain decision analysis Journal Article


Authors: Alberts, I.; Mingels, C.; Zacho, H. D.; Lanz, S.; Schöder, H.; Rominger, A.; Zwahlen, M.; Afshar-Oromieh, A.
Article Title: Comparing the clinical performance and cost efficacy of [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [(18)F]PSMA-1007 in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: A Markov chain decision analysis
Abstract: Purpose: Amongst others, [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007 are available for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer (rPC). There are currently limited data comparing the performance of these two radioligands with respect to clinical outcomes or their cost efficacy, which this study aims to address. Methods: Two hundred and forty-four patients undergoing PSMA PET/CT for rPC were retrospectively analysed for this study (one hundred and twenty two with each radiopharmaceutical) to generate rates of PET positivity, negativity and unclear findings. Patients underwent follow-up to determine the rate of additional examinations and to confirm PET findings. A Markov chain decision analysis was implemented to model clinical decision-making processes and to analyse clinical performance of the two tracers. We determine their clinical cost efficacies using cost data from several countries where both radiotracers are in routine use. Results: The PET positivity rate was non-significantly higher for [18F]PSMA-1007 compared to [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 (91.8% vs. 86.9%, p = 0.68), whereas the rate of uncertain findings was significantly greater (17.2% vs. 8.25%, p = 0.02). The probability of a true positive finding was higher for [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 (0.90, 95% CI 0.70-0.98) vs. [18F]PSMA-1007 (0.81, 95% CI 0.66–0.91). A significantly (p < 0.0001) higher PPV for [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 (0.99, 95% CI 0.99–1.0 vs. 0.86) was found compared to [18F]PSMA-1007 (0.86, 95% CI 0.82–1.00). Intervention efficacy analysis favoured [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11, where the number needed to image (to achieve a true positive finding) was 10.58 and the number needed to image to harm (to achieve a false positive finding) was − 8.08. A cost efficacy analysis favours [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in three of the four jurisdictions analysed where health economic data was available (Switzerland, Israel, Australia) and [18F]PSMA-1007 in one jurisdiction (Denmark). Conclusion: The analysis reveals a non-significantly higher PET positivity rate for [18F]PSMA-1007, but finds significantly greater rates of uncertain findings and false positive findings when compared to [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11. We find differences in the two tracers in terms of clinical performance and cost efficacy. The method presented herein is generalisable and can be used with clinical or cost data for other countries or tracers. © 2021, The Author(s).
Keywords: adult; controlled study; retrospective studies; unclassified drug; major clinical study; cancer recurrence; positron emission tomography; follow up; cancer diagnosis; diagnostic accuracy; radiopharmaceuticals; prostate specific antigen; neoplasm recurrence, local; markov chains; diagnostic imaging; retrospective study; prostate cancer; gleason score; prostatic neoplasms; cost effectiveness analysis; tumor recurrence; prostate tumor; radiopharmaceutical agent; clinical decision making; androgen deprivation therapy; oligopeptides; false positive result; biochemical recurrence; predictive value; pet/ct; decision support techniques; decision support system; nicotinamide; economic evaluation; gallium; oligopeptide; procedures; psma; edetic acid; niacinamide; gallium radioisotopes; humans; human; male; article; recurrent prostate cancer; markov chain; positron emission tomography-computed tomography; positron emission tomography computed tomography; gallium gozetotide ga 68; gallium 68 psma-11; gallium isotopes; markov chain analysis; psma 1007 f 18; psma-1007
Journal Title: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume: 49
Issue: 12
ISSN: 1619-7070
Publisher: Springer  
Date Published: 2022-10-01
Start Page: 4252
End Page: 4261
Language: English
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-021-05620-9
PUBMED: 34773473
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC9525363
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 1 November 2022 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Heiko Schoder
    546 Schoder