ArticleEuropean radiology2024
Reliability and practicability of PSMA-RADS 1.0 for structured reporting of PSMA-PET/CT scans in prostate cancer patients.
Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The emerging role of prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted radioligand therapy in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.The oncologist · 2026Review
- PSMA-RADS 2.0: clinical validation and technical considerations for prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography image interpretation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- PSMA-RADS 2.0: a revised framework for PSMA-targeted imaging interpretation and clinical decision-making.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Validation of the PSMA PRIMARY Scoring System and Comparison to an E-PSMA Likert System for [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT Interpretation in Men With Suspected Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer.Clinical nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for equivocal lesions in Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT according to PSMA-RADS 2.0 criteria.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Comparison of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Reporting and Data System Version 1.0 versus 2.0 for Prostate Cancer Assessment.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Article
- Which PSMA PET/CT interpretation criteria most effectively diagnose prostate cancer? a retrospective cohort study.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Agreement between PSMA-RADS and E-PSMA systems in classifying [Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAs structured reporting is increasingly used in the evaluation of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA-PET/CT) for prostate cancer, there is a need to assess the reliability of these frameworks. This study aimed to evaluate the intra- and interreader agreement among readers with varying levels of experience using PSMA-RADS 1.0 for interpreting PSMA-PET/CT scans, even when blinded to clinical data, and therefore to determine the feasibility of implementing this reporting system in clinical practice.
methodsPSMA-PET/CT scans of 103 patients were independently evaluated by 4 readers with different levels of experience according to the reporting and data system (RADS) for PSMA-PET/CT imaging PSMA-RADS 1.0 at 2 time points within 6 weeks. For each scan, a maximum of five target lesions were freely chosen and stratified according to PSMA-RADS 1.0. Overall scan score and compartment-based scores were assessed. Intra- and interreader agreement was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsPSMA-RADS 1.0 demonstrated excellent interreader agreement for both overall scan scores (ICC ≥ 0.91) and compartment-based scores (ICC ≥ 0.93) across all four readers. The framework showed excellent intrareader agreement for overall scan scores (ICC ≥ 0.86) and compartment-based scores (ICC ≥ 0.95), even among readers with varying levels of experience.
conclusionsPSMA-RADS 1.0 is a reliable method for assessing PSMA-PET/CT with strong consistency and agreement among readers. It shows great potential for establishing a standard approach to diagnosing and planning treatment for prostate cancer patients, and can be used confidently even by readers with less experience. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study underlines that PSMA-RADS 1.0 is a valuable and highly reliable scoring system for PSMA-PET/CT scans of prostate cancer patients and can be used confidently by radiologists with different levels of experience in routine clinical practice. KEY POINTS: PSMA-RADS version 1.0 is a scoring system for PSMA-PET/CT scans. Its reproducibility needs to be analyzed in order to make it applicable to clinical practice. Excellent interreader and intrareader agreement for overall scan scores and compartment-based scores using PSMA-RADS 1.0 were seen in readers with varying levels of experience. PSMA-RADS 1.0 is a reliable tool for accurately diagnosing and planning treatment for prostate cancer patients, and can be used confidently in clinical routine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.