Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238

See all formats and pricing


Select Volume and Issue


30,00 € / $42.00 / £23.00

Get Access to Full Text

Relationship between prostate-specific antigen kinetics and detection rate of radiolabelled choline PET/CT in restaging prostate cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Giorgio Treglia1 / Luca Ceriani1 / Ramin Sadeghi2 / Giampiero Giovacchini3 / 1

1Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland

2Nuclear Medicine Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3Department of Nuclear Medicine and Radio-Oncology, Stadtspital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland

Corresponding author: Luca Giovanella, PD, MD, Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Via Ospedale, 12, 6500, Bellinzona, Switzerland, Phone: +41 9181186 72, Fax +41 918118250, E-mail:

Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 52, Issue 5, Pages 725–733, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2013-0675, December 2013

Publication History

Published Online:


Background: The aim of the article was to systematically review published data about the relationship between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics, including PSA doubling time (PSAdt) and PSA velocity (PSAvel), and detection rate (DR) of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) using radiolabelled choline in restaging prostate cancer (PCa).

Methods: A comprehensive literature search of studies published through July 2013 regarding the relationship between PSA kinetics and DR of radiolabelled choline PET/CT was carried out. Furthermore, a meta-analysis was performed in order to establish the DR of radiolabelled choline PET/CT using different cut-off values of PSAdt (≤ or >6 months) and PSAvel [>1 or ≤1 ng/(mL year) and >2 or ≤2 ng/(mL year)]. Moreover, a pooled analysis to establish whether PSAdt and PSAvel (using the abovementioned cut-off values) may predict positive PET/CT results was carried out.

Results: Fourteen articles were selected. The pooled DR of radiolabelled choline PET/CT in restaging PCa was 58% [95% confidence interval (CI) 55–60]. Most articles reported a relationship between PSA kinetics and DR of PET/CT. Pooled DR of radiolabelled choline PET/CT increased to 65% (95% CI 58–71) when PSAdt was ≤6 months and to 71% (95% CI 66–76) and 77% (95% CI 71–82) when PSAvel was >1 or >2 ng/(mL year), respectively. PSAdt ≤6 months and PSAvel >1 or >2 ng/(mL year) proved to be relevant factors in predicting the positive result of radiolabelled choline PET/CT.

Conclusions: Due to the strong relationship between PSA kinetics and DR of radiolabelled choline PET/CT, beyond PSA values, PSAdt and PSAvel should be taken into account in the selection of PCa patients who should undergo radiolabelled choline PET/CT for restaging.

Keywords: choline; positron emission tomography; prostate cancer; prostate-specific antigen (PSA); PSA kinetics

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Tobias Maurer, Matthias Eiber, Stefano Fanti, Lars Budäus, and Valeria Panebianco
European Urology Focus, 2016
Agostino Chiaravalloti, Daniele Di Biagio, Mario Tavolozza, Ferdinando Calabria, and Orazio Schillaci
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 2016
D. Hernandez, D. Salas, D. Giménez, P. Buitrago, S. Esquena, J. Palou, P. de la Torre, J. Pernas, I. Gich, G. Gómez de Segura, J. Craven-Bartle, and G. Sancho
Radiation Oncology, 2015, Volume 10, Number 1
Kirsten Bouchelouche, Baris Turkbey, and Peter L. Choyke
Current Opinion in Oncology, 2015, Volume 27, Number 3, Page 224
D. Poncet, V. Arnoux, J.-L. Descotes, J.-J. Rambeaud, C. Verry, N. Terrier, B. Boillot, J. Dubreuil, C. Lanchon, D. Carnicelli, G. Fiard, and J.-A. Long
Progrès en Urologie, 2015, Volume 25, Number 6, Page 325
Giorgio Treglia, Carlo Vigneri, Ramin Sadeghi, Laura Evangelista, Luca Ceriani, and Luca Giovanella
Clinical and Translational Imaging, 2015, Volume 3, Number 2, Page 133
Reginald W. Dusing, Warner Peng, Sue-Min Lai, Gordon L. Grado, Jeffrey M. Holzbeierlein, J. Brantley Thrasher, Jacqueline Hill, and Peter J. Van Veldhuizen
Clinical Nuclear Medicine, 2014, Volume 39, Number 9, Page 777
T. Maurer, M. Eiber, and B.J. Krause
Der Urologe, 2014, Volume 53, Number 4, Page 469
G. Treglia, R. Sadeghi, A. Del Sole, and L. Giovanella
Clinical and Translational Oncology, 2014, Volume 16, Number 9, Page 770
Valeria Panebianco, Flavio Barchetti, Daniela Musio, Francesca De Felice, Camilla Proietti, Elena Lucia Indino, Valentina Megna, Orazio Schillaci, Carlo Catalano, and Vincenzo Tombolini
BioMed Research International, 2014, Volume 2014, Page 1

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.