new study in JAMA on PSMA-PET usage as it relates to understaging in a subset of high risk patients

[ManuteBol1]

Some remarkable results in this study published yesterday in JAMA. This paper strongly suggests that patients’ high-risk nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancers are frequently understaged by conventional imaging. The results challenge the interpretation of previous studies, such as the EMBARK trial.

jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...

[Xavier10]

Pretty much what they have been saying for awhile, no? That the PSMA scan is the way to go. Except for that small group of PCas that don't light up. But I think traditional imaging has a place in corroborating metastatic lesions also. say a swollen lymph node, a scan that shows a lesion, etc. Seems like having all of the traditional imaging and comparing would yield the best result. PSMA has false positives also. and false negatives. But clearly, PSMA scans are the best.

[David1958]

I am fortunate that at my first BCR at a level of 0.4 the doctor approved a psma PET. It found one affected node. (I'm still waiting to see if Medicare and my supplement plan covered it, as it was just done! Hopefully they didn't proceed without pre-approval)

[j-o-h-n]

I must say, those guys in their paJAMAs really know their shit...

Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.

j-o-h-n