Will recognise but not apologise.
The Study: The Europeans are team PSMA while Americans are team fluciclovine. Since there’s no more discernible reason for this than for “tumour” versus “tumor”—although clearly it should be “tumor”—the Americans at UCLA decided to conduct a prospective, single-center (not ”centre!”) trial comparing the two modalities head-to-head among 50 men with a post-prostatectomy PSA ranging from 0.2 - 2.0 ng/mL. All patients underwent both PSMA and flucivlovine PET-CTs within 15 days of enrollment with a primary endpoint of localizing the site of biochemical recurrence. Surprisingly, PSMA had nearly 5x the odds of visualizing the recurrence: 13 (26%) with team flu versus 28 (56%) with team PSMA, with big separations in detection of pelvic nodes (4 versus 15) and extra-pelvic disease (0 versus 8).
TBL: The authors were forced to concede that biochemically-recurrent prostate tumours were better localised with PET-imaging using PSMA rather than fluciclovine among this enrolment of men. | Calais, Lancet Oncol 2019