18 F DCFPyL Pet CT scan

[mklc]

18 F DCFPyL Pet CT scan

I would be grateful if anyone knows where in Europe I can do this scan?

I am open to Germany and England.

Thank you so much.

Mike

[GP24]

I had a 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT in Cologne and a 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/MRI in Münster. At the university clinics there.

[mklc in reply to GP24]

Would it be possible to give me the contacts so I can call them and book asap.

Sincere thanks. Mike

How is your health?

[GP24 in reply to mklc]

Köln:

nuklearmedizin.uk-koeln.de/...

uk-koeln.de/en/uniklinik-ko...

Münster:

ukm.de/index.php?id=nuklear...

internationalpatients.ukmue...

Currently one could classify me as "cured" but I do not know for how long:

healthunlocked.com/advanced...

[mklc in reply to GP24]

FANTASTIC...MUCH THANKS.

[cesanon in reply to GP24]

GP24

"18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT in Cologne and a 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/MRI in Münster" GP24

1. So what did you observe in the difference between the two scans?

2. How much did they cost?

[GP24 in reply to cesanon]

I would say both were equally sensitive. However, in Münster they do not report uptakes which the cannot determine as tumor lesions. If the report states "possibly a lesion here and there but not definitive", this is a pita if you want to treat these with Cyberknife. The RO does not know if he should radiate these spots or not. If he counts these too you may not be oligometastatic and you will get no radiation. It is different if you choose IMRT radiation to the pelvis to treat the mets.

Both PET scans did cost more than 2.000 Euros.

[cesces in reply to GP24]

"Münster they do not report uptakes which the cannot determine as tumor lesions."

What does that mean. The MRI sees less, or those docs were more conservative in how they read the scans.

Would you still do both scans if you had a second chance to make the decision?

[GP24 in reply to cesces]

I think the docs in Münster do not mention lesions in the report which they do not consider definitive. You may call this conservative. Also the MRI may allow them to determine slightly better if it is lesion or not.

I prefer the MRI because this (in my case) results in fewer mets and it makes it easier to get these treated by an RO.

[cesces in reply to GP24]

Was the MRI equally good for both bone and soft tissue lessions?

[GP24 in reply to cesces]

I do have no bone mets, so I cannot tell. I think it is about as good as a CT for bone mets.

[cesces in reply to GP24]

May I ask you who are the Doctors you used at each place?

[Tall_Allen]

You might wish to contact the manufacturer, Progenics Pharmaceuticals:

progenics.com/about-us/cont...

[mklc in reply to Tall_Allen]

Great idea...thank you so much Allen