1. |
- Jha, Abhishek, et al.
(author)
-
High-Specific-Activity-131I-MIBG versus 177Lu-DOTATATE Targeted Radionuclide Therapy for Metastatic Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma
- 2021
-
In: Clinical Cancer Research. - : American Association For Cancer Research (AACR). - 1078-0432 .- 1557-3265. ; 27:11, s. 2989-2995
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Targeted radionuclide therapies (TRT) using 131I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (131I-MIBG) and peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (177Lu or 90Y) represent several of the therapeutic options in the management of metastatic/inoperable pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. Recently, high-specific-activity-131I-MIBG therapy was approved by the FDA and both 177Lu-DOTATATE and 131I-MIBG therapy were recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for the treatment of metastatic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. However, a clinical dilemma often arises in the selection of TRT, especially when a patient can be treated with either type of therapy based on eligibility by MIBG and somatostatin receptor imaging. To address this problem, we assembled a group of international experts, including oncologists, endocrinologists, and nuclear medicine physicians, with substantial experience in treating neuroendocrine tumors with TRTs to develop consensus and provide expert recommendations and perspectives on how to select between these two therapeutic options for metastatic/inoperable pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. This article aims to summarize the survival outcomes of the available TRTs; discuss personalized treatment strategies based on functional imaging scans; address practical issues, including regulatory approvals; and compare toxicities and risk factors across treatments. Furthermore, it discusses the emerging TRTs.
|
|
2. |
- Oprea-Lager, Daniela Elena, et al.
(author)
-
European Association of Nuclear Medicine Focus 5 : Consensus on Molecular Imaging and Theranostics in Prostate Cancer
- 2024
-
In: European Urology. - 0302-2838. ; 85:1, s. 49-60
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: In prostate cancer (PCa), questions remain on indications for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and PSMA radioligand therapy, integration of advanced imaging in nomogram-based decision-making, dosimetry, and development of new theranostic applications. Objective: We aimed to critically review developments in molecular hybrid imaging and systemic radioligand therapy, to reach a multidisciplinary consensus on the current state of the art in PCa. Design, setting, and participants: The results of a systematic literature search informed a two-round Delphi process with a panel of 28 PCa experts in medical or radiation oncology, urology, radiology, medical physics, and nuclear medicine. The results were discussed and ratified in a consensus meeting. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Forty-eight statements were scored on a Likert agreement scale and six as ranking options. Agreement statements were analysed using the RAND appropriateness method. Ranking statements were analysed using weighted summed scores. Results and limitations: After two Delphi rounds, there was consensus on 42/48 (87.5%) of the statements. The expert panel recommends PSMA PET to be used for staging the majority of patients with unfavourable intermediate and high risk, and for restaging of suspected recurrent PCa. There was consensus that oligometastatic disease should be defined as up to five metastases, even using advanced imaging modalities. The group agreed that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA should not be administered only after progression to cabazitaxel and that [223Ra]RaCl2 remains a valid therapeutic option in bone-only metastatic castration-resistant PCa. Uncertainty remains on various topics, including the need for concordant findings on both [18F]FDG and PSMA PET prior to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy. Conclusions: There was a high proportion of agreement among a panel of experts on the use of molecular imaging and theranostics in PCa. Although consensus statements cannot replace high-certainty evidence, these can aid in the interpretation and dissemination of best practice from centres of excellence to the wider clinical community. Patient summary: There are situations when dealing with prostate cancer (PCa) where both the doctors who diagnose and track the disease development and response to treatment, and those who give treatments are unsure about what the best course of action is. Examples include what methods they should use to obtain images of the cancer and what to do when the cancer has returned or spread. We reviewed published research studies and provided a summary to a panel of experts in imaging and treating PCa. We also used the research summary to develop a questionnaire whereby we asked the experts to state whether or not they agreed with a list of statements. We used these results to provide guidance to other health care professionals on how best to image men with PCa and what treatments to give, when, and in what order, based on the information the images provide.
|
|
3. |
- Veit-Haibach, Patrick, et al.
(author)
-
International EANM-SNMMI-ISMRM consensus recommendation for PET/MRI in oncology
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. - : Springer Nature. - 1619-7070 .- 1619-7089. ; 50:12, s. 3513-3537
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) is an international scientific and professional organization founded in 1954 to promote the science, technology, and practical application of nuclear medicine. The European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) is a professional non-profit medical association that facilitates communication worldwide between individuals pursuing clinical and research excellence in nuclear medicine. The EANM was founded in 1985. The merged International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM) is an international, nonprofit, scientific association whose purpose is to promote communication, research, development, and applications in the field of magnetic resonance in medicine and biology and other related topics and to develop and provide channels and facilities for continuing education in the field.The ISMRM was founded in 1994 through the merger of the Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and the Society of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. SNMMI, ISMRM, and EANM members are physicians, technologists, and scientists specializing in the research and practice of nuclear medicine and/or magnetic resonance imaging.The SNMMI, ISMRM, and EANM will periodically define new guidelines for nuclear medicine practice to help advance the science of nuclear medicine and/or magnetic resonance imaging and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the world. Existing practice guidelines will be reviewed for revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner, if indicated. Each practice guideline, representing a policy statement by the SNMMI/EANM/ISMRM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review. The SNMMI, ISMRM, and EANM recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic nuclear medicine imaging and magnetic resonance imaging requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guideline by those entities not providing these services is not authorized.These guidelines are an educational tool designed to assist practitioners in providing appropriate care for patients. They are not inflexible rules or requirements of practice and are not intended, nor should they be used, to establish a legal standard of care. For these reasons and those set forth below, the SNMMI, the ISMRM, and the EANM caution against the use of these guidelines in litigation in which the clinical decisions of a practitioner are called into question.The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure or course of action must be made by the physician or medical physicist in light of all the circumstances presented. Thus, there is no implication that an approach differing from the guidelines, standing alone, is below the standard of care. To the contrary, a conscientious practitioner may responsibly adopt a course of action different from that set forth in the guidelines when, in the reasonable judgment of the practitioner, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources, or advances in knowledge or technology subsequent to publication of the guidelines.The practice of medicine includes both the art and the science of the prevention, diagnosis, alleviation, and treatment of disease. The variety and complexity of human conditions make it impossible to always reach the most appropriate diagnosis or to predict with certainty a particular response to treatment.Therefore, it should be recognized that adherence to these guidelines will not ensure an accurate diagnosis or a successful outcome. All that should be expected is that the practitioner will follow a reasonable course of action based on current knowledge, available resources, and the needs of the patient to deliver effective and safe medical care. The sole purpose of these guidelines is to assist practitioners in achieving this objective.
|
|