Top

Cancer Imaging

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Computed Tomography | Research article

Optimizing PSMA scintigraphy for resource limited settings – a retrospective comparative study

Authors: Olumayowa U. Kolade, Anita Brink, Akinwale O. Ayeni, Stuart More, Jennifer Holness

Published in: Cancer Imaging | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

PSMA PET/CT is the most sensitive molecular imaging modality for prostate cancer (PCa), yet much of the developing world has little or no access to PET/CT. [^99mTc]Tc-PSMA scintigraphy (PS) is a cheaper and more accessible gamma camera-based alternative. However, many resource-constrained departments have only a single camera without tomographic or hybrid imaging functionality, and camera time is frequently in high demand. Simplifying imaging protocols by limiting the field of view (FOV) and omitting SPECT/CT or even SPECT may provide a partial solution. The aim was thus to determine the adequacy of PS planar-only and/or SPECT-only imaging protocols with a limited FOV.

Methods

The scans of 95 patients with histologically proven PCa who underwent PS with full-body planar and multi-FOV SPECT/CT were reviewed. The detection rates for uptake in the prostate gland/bed and in metastases were compared on planar, SPECT, and SPECT/CT. The agreement between modalities was calculated for the detection of metastases and for staging. The impact of imaging a limited FOV was determined.

Results

Pathological prostatic uptake was seen in all cases on SPECT/CT (excluding two post-prostatectomy patients), 90.3% of cases on SPECT, and 15.1% on planar images (p < 0.001). Eleven (11.7%) patients had seminal vesicle involvement on SPECT/CT, which was undetectable/indistinguishable on planar images and SPECT. The agreement between modalities was moderate to good (κ = 0.41 to 0.61) for the detection of nodal metastases, with detection rates that did not differ significantly (SPECT/CT = 11.6%, SPECT = 8.4%, planar = 5.3%). Detection rates for bone metastases were 14.7% (SPECT/CT) and 11.6% (SPECT and planar). Agreement between modalities for the detection of bone metastases was good (κ = 0.73 to 0.77). Three (3.1%) patients had visceral metastases on SPECT/CT, two of which were detected on SPECT and planar. There was good agreement between modalities for the TNM staging of patients (κ = 0.70 to 0.88). No metastatic lesions were missed on the limited FOV images.

Conclusion

When PS scintigraphy is performed, SPECT/CT is recommended. However, the lack of SPECT/CT capabilities should not preclude the use of PS in the presence of limited resources, as both planar and SPECT imaging are adequate and will correctly stage most PCa patients. Furthermore, time-based optimisations are achievable by limiting the FOV to exclude the distal lower limbs.

Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, Bray F, Jemal A. Recent global patterns in prostate Cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol. 2020;77(1):38–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.08.005.CrossRefPubMed

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.CrossRefPubMed

Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EA, Pinsky PF, Moss SM, Qiu S, et al. Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167(7):449–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Donohoe KJ, Cohen EJ, Giammarile F, Grady E, Greenspan BS, Henkin RE, et al. Appropriate use criteria for bone scintigraphy in prostate and breast cancer: summary and excerpts. Soc Nuclear Med. 2017;

Mottet N, Van Den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van Den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate Cancer—2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):243–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042.CrossRefPubMed

Trabulsi EJ, Rumble RB, Vargas HA. Optimum imaging strategies for advanced prostate Cancer: ASCO guideline summary. JCO oncology practice. 2020;16(4):170–6.CrossRefPubMed

Schaeffer E, Srinivas S, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ, Bekelman JE, Cheng H, et al. NCCN guidelines insights: prostate Cancer, version 1.2021: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2021;19(2):134–43.CrossRef

Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(8):1356–67.PubMed

Ghosh A, Heston WD. Tumor target prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and its regulation in prostate cancer. J Cell Biochem. 2004;91(3):528–39.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Zhao J, Mangarova DB, Brangsch J, Kader A, Hamm B, Brenner W, et al. Correlation between Intraprostatic PSMA Uptake and MRI PI-RADS of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Comparison of PI-RADS Version 2.0 and PI-RADS Version 2.1. Cancers. 2020;12(12):3523. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/12/12/3523CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Ceci F, Cho S, et al. 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44(6):1014–24.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Kratochwil C, Fendler WP, Eiber M, Baum R, Bozkurt MF, Czernin J, et al. EANM procedure guidelines for radionuclide therapy with 177 Lu-labelled PSMA-ligands (177 Lu-PSMA-RLT). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46(12):2536–44.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hijazi S, Meller B, Leitsmann C, Strauss A, Meller J, Ritter C, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for nodal oligometastatic prostate cancer detected by 68Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate. 2015;75(16):1934–40.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Habl G, Sauter K, Schiller K, Dewes S, Maurer T, Eiber M, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-PET for radiation treatment planning in prostate cancer recurrences after surgery: individualized medicine or new standard in salvage treatment. Prostate. 2017;77(8):920–7.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Weirich G, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of 68gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2016;195(5):1436–43.CrossRefPubMed

16.

PET Scanners per 1 million - IAEA Medical Imaging and Nuclear Medicine Global Resources Database (IMAGINE) [Internet]. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 2023. Available from: https://www.iaea.org/resources/hhc/nuclear-medicine/databases/imagine/pet-scanners.

17.

Organization WH. Global atlas of medical devices 2022. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/364709/9789240062207-eng.pdf?sequence=1.

18.

Health N. Cost of PET Scan in Lagos: Nimed Health; 2021 [Available from: https://nimedhealth.com.ng/2021/09/17/cost-of-pet-scan-in-lagos-nigeria/.

19.

Infoline A. PET CT Scan Cost in African Cities: Africa Infoline; 2024 [Available from: https://africainfoline.com/listing/scans/africa/pet-ct-scan-cost-in-african-cities-find-best-hospital-and-book-appointment/.

20.

Albalooshi B. Direct comparison of 99mTc-PSMA SPECT/CT and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology. 2020;8(1):1.PubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Rahmim A, Zaidi H. PET versus SPECT: strengths, limitations and challenges. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(3):193–207. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282f3a515.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Fallahi B, Khademi N, Karamzade-Ziarati N, Fard-Esfahani A, Emami-Ardekani A, Farzanefar S, et al. 99mTc-PSMA SPECT/CT versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2021;46(2):e68–74.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Su H-C, Zhu Y, Ling G-W, Hu S-L, Xu X-P, Dai B, et al. Evaluation of 99mTc-labeled PSMA-SPECT/CT imaging in prostate cancer patients who have undergone biochemical relapse. Asian journal of andrology. 2017;19(3):267–71. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.192638. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27976632, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427779/CrossRefPubMed

24.

Robu S, Schottelius M, Eiber M, Maurer T, Gschwend J, Schwaiger M, et al. Preclinical Evaluation and First Patient Application of <sup>99m</sup>Tc-PSMA-I&S for SPECT Imaging and Radioguided Surgery in Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(2):235–42. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.178939. Available from: https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/jnumed/58/2/235.full.pdfCrossRefPubMed

25.

Werner P, Neumann C, Eiber M, Wester HJ, Schottelius M. [99cmTc]Tc-PSMA-I&S-SPECT/CT: experience in prostate cancer imaging in an outpatient center. EJNMMI Res. 2020;10(1):45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-020-00635-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Schmidkonz C, Goetz TI, Kuwert T, Ritt P, Prante O, Bäuerle T, et al. PSMA SPECT/CT with 99mTc-MIP-1404 in biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: predictive factors and efficacy for the detection of PSMA-positive lesions at low and very-low PSA levels. Ann Nucl Med. 2019;33(12):891–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-019-01400-6.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Kabunda J, Gabela L, Kalinda C, Aldous C, Pillay V, Nyakale N. Comparing 99mTc-PSMA to 99mTc-MDP in prostate Cancer staging of the skeletal system. Clin Nucl Med. 2021;46(7):562.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Rathke H, Afshar-Oromieh A, Giesel FL, Kremer C, Flechsig P, Haufe S, et al. Intra-individual comparison of Tc-99m-MDP bone scan and the PSMA-ligand Tc-99m-MIP-1427 in patients with osseous metastasized prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2018;

29.

Lawal IO, Ankrah AO, Mokgoro NP, Vorster M, Maes A, Sathekge MM. Diagnostic sensitivity of Tc-99m HYNIC PSMA SPECT/CT in prostate carcinoma: a comparative analysis with Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT. Prostate. 2017;77(11):1205–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23379?download=true.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Vangu M, Kasapato T. Imaging with PSMA: which approach when only tech rather than Galli is available? J Nucl Med. 2019;60(supplement 1):1559. https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/60/supplement_1/1559.short

31.

Ellmann A. A44 nuclear medicine in Africa. Nucl Med Commun. 2004;25(10):1066–7. https://journals.lww.com/nuclearmedicinecomm/Fulltext/2004/10000/A44_Nuclear_medicine_in_Africa.53.aspxCrossRef

32.

Orunmuyi AT, Lawal IO, Omofuma OO, Taiwo OJ, Sathekge MM. Underutilisation of nuclear medicine scans at a regional hospital in Nigeria: need for implementation research. Ecancermedicalscience. 2020;14:1093. https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2020.1093. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33014135, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7498276/CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Dondi M, Kashyap R, Paez D, Pascual T, Zaknun J, Bastos FM, et al. Trends in nuclear medicine in developing countries. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(Supplement 2):16S–23S. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.111.089193. Available from: https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/jnumed/52/Supplement_2/16S.full.pdfCrossRefPubMed

34.

Lee DS, Lee Y-S, Lee JS, Suh MS. Promotion of nuclear medicine-related sciences in developing countries. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;53(2):73–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-019-00583-0. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31057676, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6473009/CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Jaiyeola AO, Bayat A. Assessment of trends in income poverty in Nigeria from 2010–2013: an analysis based on the Nigeria general household survey. J Poverty. 2020;24(3):185–202.CrossRef

36.

Tabata K-i, Niibe Y, Satoh T, Tsumura H, Ikeda M, Minamida S, et al. Radiotherapy for oligometastases and oligo-recurrence of bone in prostate cancer. Pulmonary medicine. 2012;2012

37.

Ahmed KA, Barney BM, Davis BJ, Park SS, Kwon ED, Olivier KR. Stereotactic body radiation therapy in the treatment of oligometastatic prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2013;2:215.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, Byrd DR, Brookland RK, Washington MK, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. Springer; 2017.

39.

Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumours. John Wiley & Sons; 2017.

40.

Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20(1):37–46.CrossRef

41.

Seifert R, Gafita A, Telli T, Voter A, Herrmann K, Pomper M, et al. Standardized PSMA-PET imaging of advanced prostate Cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2024;54(1):60–8. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2023.07.005. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001299823000594CrossRefPubMed

42.

Veerman H, Donswijk M, Bekers E, Olde Heuvel J, YJL B, Boellaard TN, et al. The clinical characteristics of patients with primary non-prostate-specific membrane antigen-expressing prostate cancer on preoperative positron emission tomography/computed tomography. BJU Int. 2022;129(3):314–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15664.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, Williams M, Udovicich C, Vela I, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer—updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77(4):403–17.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Fendler WP, Schmidt DF, Wenter V, Thierfelder KM, Zach C, Stief C, et al. <sup>68</sup>Ga-PSMA PET/CT detects the location and extent of primary prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(11):1720–5. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.172627. https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/jnumed/57/11/1720.full.pdfCrossRefPubMed

45.

von Klot C-AJ, Merseburger AS, Böker A, Schmuck S, Ross TL, Bengel FM, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging predicting Intraprostatic tumor extent, extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion prior to radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate Cancer. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;51(4):314–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-017-0476-7.CrossRef

46.

Tulsyan S, Das CJ, Tripathi M, Seth A, Kumar R, Bal C. Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and multiparametric MRI for staging of high-risk prostate cancer68Ga-PSMA PET and MRI in prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38(12):1094–102. https://doi.org/10.1097/mnm.0000000000000749. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/nuclearmedicinecomm/Fulltext/2017/12000/Comparison_of_68Ga_PSMA_PET_CT_and_multiparametric.12.aspxCrossRefPubMed

47.

Eiber M, Herrmann K, Calais J, Hadaschik B, Giesel FL, Hartenbach M, et al. Prostate Cancer molecular imaging standardized evaluation (PROMISE): proposed miTNM classification for the interpretation of PSMA-ligand PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(3):469–78. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.198119.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Mannweiler S, Amersdorfer P, Trajanoski S, Terrett JA, King D, Mehes G. Heterogeneity of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression in prostate carcinoma with distant metastasis. Pathol Oncol Res. 2009;15(2):167–72.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Steuber T, Graefen M, Haese A, Erbersdobler A, Chun FK-H, Schlom T, et al. Validation of a nomogram for prediction of side specific extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175(3):939–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00342-3.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Mikel Hubanks J, Boorjian SA, Frank I, Gettman MT, Houston Thompson R, Rangel LJ, et al. The presence of extracapsular extension is associated with an increased risk of death from prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy for patients with seminal vesicle invasion and negative lymph nodes. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2014;32(1):26.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2012.09.002.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Yossepowitch O, Eggener SE, Bianco FJ, Carver BS, Serio A, Scardino PT, et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized, high risk prostate Cancer: critical analysis of risk assessment methods. J Urol. 2007;178(2):493–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.105.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Schmidkonz C, Cordes M, Beck M, Goetz TI, Schmidt D, Prante O, et al. SPECT/CT with the PSMA ligand 99mTc-MIP-1404 for whole-body primary staging of patients with prostate Cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43(4):225–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/rlu.0000000000001991.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Schmidkonz C, Atzinger A, Goetz TI, Beck M, Ritt P, Prante O, et al. 99mTc-MIP-1404 SPECT/CT for Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Interobserver and Intraobserver Variability in Treatment-Related Longitudinal Tracer Uptake Assessments of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen–Positive Lesions. Clin Nucl Med. 2020;45(2):105–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/rlu.0000000000002880.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Li B, Duan L, Shi J, Han Y, Wei W, Cheng X, et al. Diagnostic performance of 99mTc-HYNIC-PSMA SPECT/CT for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Front Oncol. 2022:12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.1072437.

55.

Sergieva S, Mangaldgiev R, Dimcheva M, Nedev K, Zahariev Z, Robev B. SPECT-CT imaging with [99mTc]PSMA-T4 in patients with recurrent prostate Cancer. Nuclear Medicine Review. 2021;24(2):70–81. https://doi.org/10.5603/nmr.2021.0018.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Cerci JJ, Etchebehere EC, Nadel H, Brink A, Bal CS, Rangarajan V, et al. Is true whole-body F-FDG PET/CT required in pediatric lymphoma? An IAEA multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(8):1087–93. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.222299.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Gates GF, editor SPECT bone scanning of the spine. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine; 1998: Elsevier.

58.

Han L, Au-Yong T, Tong W, Chu K, Szeto L, Wong C. Comparison of bone single-photon emission tomography and planar imaging in the detection of vertebral metastases in patients with back pain. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(6):635–8.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Horger M, Bares R, editors. The role of single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography in benign and malignant bone disease. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine; 2006: Elsevier.

60.

Ben-Haim S, Israel O, editors. Breast cancer: role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine; 2009: Elsevier.

61.

Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I. The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, single-and multi-field-of-view SPECT, 18F-fluoride PET, and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(2):287–97.PubMed

62.

Ndlovu X, George R, Ellmann A, Warwick J. Should SPECT-CT replace SPECT for the evaluation of equivocal bone scan lesions in patients with underlying malignancies? Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(7):659–65. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283399107.CrossRefPubMed

63.

(WHO) WHO. Global atlas of medical devices 2017 [Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/255181/9789241512312-eng.pdf.

64.

de Feria Cardet RE, Hofman MS, Segard T, Yim J, Williams S, Francis RJ, et al. Is prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging cost-effective in prostate Cancer: an analysis informed by the proPSMA trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79(3):413–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.043.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Smith BV, Kronick K, Rathod J, Abramowitz N, Williams Z. Start where you are. Use What You Have. Do What You Can; 2019.

Title: Optimizing PSMA scintigraphy for resource limited settings – a retrospective comparative study
Authors: Olumayowa U. Kolade
Anita Brink
Akinwale O. Ayeni
Stuart More
Jennifer Holness
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Computed Tomography
Computed Tomography
Scintigraphy
Prostate Cancer
Prostate Cancer
Metastasis
Positron Emission Tomography
Published in: Cancer Imaging / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1470-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-024-00693-9

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Applying dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI tracer kinetic models to differentiate benign and malignant soft tissue tumors

Effect of Hashimoto’s thyroiditis on the dual-energy CT quantitative parameters and performance in diagnosing metastatic cervical lymph nodes in patients with papillary thyroid cancer

Deep learning-based metastasis detection in patients with lung cancer to enhance reproducibility and reduce workload in brain metastasis screening with MRI: a multi-center study

HCC portal hypertension imaging score derived from CT predicts re-bleeding and mortality after acute variceal bleeding

Development and validation of a nomogram model based on pretreatment ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound to predict the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer

MR-based radiomics predictive modelling of EGFR mutation and HER2 overexpression in metastatic brain adenocarcinoma: a two-centre study

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer