International W. Prostate cancer statistics. Latest prostate cancer data. London: WCRF International 2020.

FDA. FDA approves first PSMA-targeted PET imaging drug for men with prostate cancer. US; 2020.

Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395:1208–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Emmett L, Buteau J, Papa N, Moon D, Thompson J, Roberts MJ, et al. The additive diagnostic value of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging triage in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PRIMARY): a prospective multicentre study. Eur Urol. 2021;80:682–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.002

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ghosh A, Heston WD. Tumor target prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and its regulation in prostate cancer. J Cell Biochem. 2004;91:528–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcb.10661

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Van de Wiele C, Sathekge M, de Spiegeleer B, de Jonghe PJ, Beels L, Maes A. PSMA-targeting positron emission agents for imaging solid tumors other than non-prostate carcinoma: a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20194886.

Bagguley D, Ong S, Buteau JP, Koschel S, Dhiantravan N, Hofman MS, et al. Role of PSMA PET/CT imaging in the diagnosis, staging and restaging of prostate cancer. Future Oncol. 2021;17:2225–41. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2020-1293

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

FDA. FDA approves second PSMA-targeted PET imaging drug for men with prostate cancer. US; 2021.

FDA approves flotufolastat fluorine-18 injection, first radiohybrid PSMA-targeted PET imaging agent for prostate cancer [Internet]. [cited 2023 Nov 24]. Available from: https://ascopost.com/news/may-2023/fda-approves-flotufolastat-fluorine-18-injection-first-radiohybrid-psma-targeted-pet-imaging-agent-for-prostate-cancer/

Whiting PFRA, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–36.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Draulans C, Pos F, Smeenk RJ, Kerkmeijer L, Vogel WV, Nagarajah J, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET, (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET, and MRI for Gross Tumor Volume Delineation in Primary Prostate Cancer: Intermodality and Intertracer Variability. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2021;11:202–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2020.11.006

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Pattison DA, Debowski M, Gulhane B, Arnfield EG, Pelecanos AM, Garcia PL, et al. Prospective intra-individual blinded comparison of [(18)F]PSMA-1007 and [(68) Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging in patients with confirmed prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:763–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05520-y

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sharma P, Watts A, Singh H. Comparison of internal dosimetry of 18 F-PSMA-1007 and 68 Ga-PSMA-11-HBED-CC. Clin Nucl Med. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004353.

Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:135.

Kuten J, Fahoum I, Savin Z, Shamni O, Gitstein G, Hershkovitz D, et al. Head-to-head comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 with (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in staging prostate cancer using histopathology and immunohistochemical analysis as a reference standard. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:527–32. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.234187

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chandekar KR, Singh H, Kumar R, Kumar S, Kakkar N, Mittal BR, et al. Comparison of 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT With 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for initial staging in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2023;48:e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004430

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hoffmann MA, von Eyben FE, Fischer N, Rosar F, Muller-Hubenthal J, Buchholz HG, et al. Comparison of [(18)F]PSMA-1007 with [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in restaging of prostate cancer patients with PSA relapse. Cancers. 2022;14. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14061479.

Alberts I, Mingels C, Zacho HD, Lanz S, Schoder H, Rominger A, et al. 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. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05620-9.

Emmett LEJ, Amin A, Sheehan-Dare G, Cusick T. Pilot trial comparing the performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT to 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in the detection of prostate cancer recurrence in men with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy. J Radiol Med Imaging. 2021;4:1039.

Rauscher I, Kronke M, Konig M, Gafita A, Maurer T, Horn T, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT: frequency of pitfalls and detection efficacy in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:51–7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.229187

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hoberuck S, Lock S, Borkowetz A, Sommer U, Winzer R, Zophel K, et al. Intraindividual comparison of [(68) Ga]-Ga-PSMA-11 and [(18)F]-F-PSMA-1007 in prostate cancer patients: a retrospective single-center analysis. EJNMMI Res. 2021;11:109. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-021-00845-z

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dias AH, Jochumsen MR, Zacho HD, Munk OL, Gormsen LC. Multiparametric dynamic whole-body PSMA PET/CT using [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [(18)F]PSMA-1007. EJNMMI Res. 2023;13:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-023-00981-8

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dietlein M, Kobe C, Kuhnert G, Stockter S, Fischer T, Schomacker K, et al. Comparison of [(18)F]DCFPyL and [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET imaging in patients with relapsed prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17:575–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-015-0866-0

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dietlein F, Kobe C, Neubauer S, Schmidt M, Stockter S, Fischer T, et al. PSA-stratified performance of (18)F- and (68)Ga-PSMA PET in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:947–52. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.185538

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ferreira G, Iravani A, Hofman MS, Hicks RJ. Intra-individual comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-DCFPyL normal-organ biodistribution. Cancer Imaging. 2019;19:23 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-019-0211-y

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dietlein F, Hohberg M, Kobe C, Zlatopolskiy BD, Krapf P, Endepols H, et al. An (18)F-labeled PSMA ligand for PET/CT of prostate cancer: first-in-humans observational study and clinical experience with (18)F-JK-PSMA-7 during the first year of application. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:202–9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.229542

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

De Man K, Van Laeken N, Schelfhout V, Fendler WP, Lambert B, Kersemans K, et al. (18)F-PSMA-11 versus (68)Ga-PSMA-11 positron emission tomography/computed tomography for staging and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a prospective double-blind randomised cross-over trial. Eur Urol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.05.010.

Kroenke M, Mirzoyan L, Horn T, Peeken JC, Wurzer A, Wester HJ, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-rhPSMA-7 PET/CT in patients with primary and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: frequency of non-tumor-related uptake and tumor positivity. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:1082–8. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.251447

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kesch C, Kratochwil C, Mier W, Kopka K, Giesel FL. (68)Ga or (18)F for prostate cancer imaging? J Nucl Med.2017;58:687–8. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.190157.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Lengana T, Lawal IO, Rensburg CV, Mokoala KMG, Moshokoa E, Ridgard T, et al. A comparison of the diagnostic performance of (18)F-PSMA-1007 and (68)GA-PSMA-11 in the same patients presenting with early biochemical recurrence. Hell J Nucl Med. 2021;24:178–85. https://doi.org/10.1967/s002449912401

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Scobioala S, Kittel C, Wolters H, Huss S, Elsayad K, Seifert R, et al. Diagnostic efficiency of hybrid imaging using PSMA ligands, PET/CT, PET/MRI and MRI in identifying malignant prostate lesions. Ann Nucl Med. 2021;35:628–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-021-01606-7

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Seifert R, Telli T, Opitz M, Barbato F, Berliner C, Nader M, et al. Unspecific (18)F-PSMA-1007 bone uptake evaluated through PSMA-11 PET, bone scanning, and MRI triple validation in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2023;64:738–43. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.215434

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Arnfield EG, Thomas PA, Roberts MJ, Pelecanos AM, Ramsay SC, Lin CY, et al. Clinical insignificance of [(18)F]PSMA-1007 avid non-specific bone lesions: a retrospective evaluation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:4495–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05456-3

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Maisto C, Aurilio M, Morisco A, de Marino R, Buonanno Recchimuzzo MJ, Carideo L, et al. Analysis of pros and cons in using [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [(18)F]PSMA-1007: production, costs, and PET/CT applications in patients with prostate cancer. Molecules. 2022;27. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27123862.

Jussing E, Milton S, Samén E, Moein MM, Bylund L, Axelsson R, et al. Clinically applicable cyclotron-produced gallium-68 gives high-yield radiolabeling of DOTA-based tracers. Biomolecules. 2021;11. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom11081118.

Kersemans K, De Man K, Courtyn J, Van Royen T, Piron S, Moerman L, et al. Automated radiosynthesis of Al[(18)F]PSMA-11 for large-scale routine use. Appl Radiat Isot. 2018;135:19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2018.01.006

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

von Hippel PT. The heterogeneity statistic I(2) can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0024-z

Article  Google Scholar 

Zhang YN, Lu ZG, Wang SD, Lu X, Zhu LL, Yang X, et al. Gross tumor volume delineation in primary prostate cancer on (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/MRI and (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI. Cancer Imaging. 2022;22:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-022-00475-1

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hammes J, Hohberg M, Tager P, Wild M, Zlatopolskiy B, Krapf P, et al. Uptake in non-affected bone tissue does not differ between [18F]-DCFPyL and [68Ga]-HBED-CC PSMA PET/CT. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0209613. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209613

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Jansen BHE, Kramer GM, Cysouw MCF, Yaqub MM, de Keizer B, Lavalaye J, et al. Healthy Tissue Uptake of (68)Ga-Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen, (18)F-DCFPyL, (18)F-Fluoromethylcholine, and (18)F-Dihydrotestosterone. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:1111–7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.222505

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Bodar YJL, Veerman H, Meijer D, de Bie K, van Leeuwen PJ, Donswijk ML, et al. Standardised uptake values as determined on prostate‐specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography is associated with oncological outcomes in patients with prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2022;129:768–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15710

Article