Nicolás Sierrasesúmaga-Martín 1
, Sergio Martín-Martín 1
, Miguel Pascual-Samaniego 1
, Esther Valsero-Herguedas 1
, Juan R. Torrecilla-García-Ripoll 1
, Fátima Castroviejo-Royo 1
, Raúl Calvo-González 1
, María Bedate-Núñez 1
, Noelia Álvarez-Mena 2
, Marta Senovilla-Martínez 3
, M. Consuelo Conde-Redondo 1
, Jesús Calleja-Escudero 1 
1 Servicio de Urología, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, España; 2 Servicio de Medicina Nuclear, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, olid, España; 3 Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Valladolid. Valladolid, España
*Correspondence: Nicolás Sierrasesúmaga-Martín. Email: nsierrasesu@gmail.com
Objective: To evaluate predictive factors for a positive [18F]PSMA PET/TC scan in patients with early biochemical recurrence (PSA 0.2-0.5 ng/mL) after radical prostatectomy, with no prior therapy. Method: An observational, retrospective, single-center study included 79 patients with prostate adenocarcinoma treated with radical prostatectomy and a PSA level between 0.2–0.5 ng/ mL, who underwent [18F]PSMA PET/TC. Clinicopathological variables, PET results, and treatment changes were analyzed. Results: The [18F]PSMA PET/TC was positive in 54.4% (43/79) of patients. The most frequent sites of recurrence were pelvic lymph nodes (30.4%) and the prostate bed (17.7%). The PET result altered the therapeutic plan in 51.9% of cases, leading to optimized radiotherapy planning (45.5%) or the initiation of hormonal therapy (29.1%). Independent predictors of a positive PET scan were: PSADT < 6 months (OR: 3.63; 95% CI: 1.18–11.15) and a high ISUP (3-5 vs. 1-2; OR: 3.72; 95% CI: 1.30-10.64). The model’s area under the curve was 0.764 (95% CI: 0.652-0.876). Conclusions: [18F]PSMA PET/TC is a highly valuable tool in early biochemical recurrence (PSA 0.2-0.5 ng/mL) post-surgery, with a high detection rate (54.4%). It significantly alters treatment planning, optimizing radiotherapy or guiding hormone therapy. These findings support its use for planning targeted treatments with curative intent, although prospective studies are needed to confirm survival benefits.
Content available only in Spanish.
Content available only in Spanish.
The editorial process consists of 6 stages:
1. Reception of the manuscript (indeterminate, depending on whether the author meets the requirements): its objective is to verify that the manuscript complies with the specifications of these instructions for authors and that the submitted documentation is complete.
2. Initial editorial review (maximum 5 business days): its objective is to corroborate the relevance, timeliness, originality, and scientific contribution of the manuscript, as well as the methodological and statistical soundness of the study. At this time, it will be submitted to an electronic plagiarism detection system. Derived from this, a rejected opinion may be obtained, or it will be sent for review by peer researchers.
3. Review by peer researchers (maximum 30 business days): the opinion of at least two experts in the area in question will be obtained, who will evaluate the technical and methodological aspects of the investigation.
4. Editorial review (maximum 7 business days): its objective is to make a decision based on the opinion of peer reviewers. The opinion can be rejected, major changes, minor changes or accepted. In the case of major or minor changes, it will be submitted again for evaluation by the initial peer reviewers.
5. Final edition (6 weeks): its objective is the technical and linguistic edition (and translation), layout of galleys, DOI assignment, and correction by the author.
6. Advanced publication: All manuscripts will be published ahead of print on the journal’s website as soon as they complete the editing process, until they are incorporated into a final issue of the journal.