<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="review-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Digital Diagnostics</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Digital Diagnostics</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Digital Diagnostics</trans-title></trans-title-group><trans-title-group xml:lang="zh"><trans-title>Digital Diagnostics</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2712-8490</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2712-8962</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Eco-Vector</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">633487</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17816/DD633487</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Reviews</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Научные обзоры</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="zh"><subject>科学评论</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Review Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Comparative role of radiological imaging methods in biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Сравнительная роль методов лучевой диагностики при биохимическом рецидиве рака предстательной железы</trans-title></trans-title-group><trans-title-group xml:lang="zh"><trans-title>前列腺癌生化复发的放射学诊断方法比较研究</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6541-179X</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">5840-7590</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Rostovtseva</surname><given-names>Tatiana M.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ростовцева</surname><given-names>Татьяна Михайловна</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname>Rostovtseva</surname><given-names>Tatiana M.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><email>rostovtsevat@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3930-5998</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">6388-9644</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Dolgushin</surname><given-names>Mikhail B.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Долгушин</surname><given-names>Михаил Борисович</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname>Dolgushin</surname><given-names>Mikhail B.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>д-р мед. наук, профессор, академик РАН</p></bio><bio xml:lang="zh"><p>MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences</p></bio><email>dolgushin.m@fccps.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9267-3602</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">9812-0420</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Karalkina</surname><given-names>Mariya A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Каралкина</surname><given-names>Мария Алексеевна</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname>Karalkina</surname><given-names>Mariya A.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>канд. мед. наук</p></bio><bio xml:lang="zh"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><email>karalkina.m@fccps.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6494-8017</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">1400-5957</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Koroid</surname><given-names>Olga A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Короид</surname><given-names>Ольга Анатольевна</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname>Koroid</surname><given-names>Olga A.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>канд. мед. наук</p></bio><bio xml:lang="zh"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><email>olga_koroid@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5649-2193</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">8449-6590</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Sinitsyn</surname><given-names>Valentin E.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Синицын</surname><given-names>Валентин Евгеньевич</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname>Sinitsyn</surname><given-names>Valentin E.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>д-р мед. наук, профессор</p></bio><bio xml:lang="zh"><p>MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine), Professor</p></bio><email>vsini@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Federal Center of Brain Research and Neurotechnologies</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Федеральный центр мозга и нейротехнологий</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="zh">Federal Center of Brain Research and Neurotechnologies</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><aff-alternatives id="aff2"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Lomonosov Moscow State University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="zh">Lomonosov Moscow State University</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><aff-alternatives id="aff3"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Medicine and Nuclear Technologies</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">«Медицина и ядерные технологии»</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="zh">Medicine and Nuclear Technologies</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="preprint" iso-8601-date="2025-01-22" publication-format="electronic"><day>22</day><month>01</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2025-03-25" publication-format="electronic"><day>25</day><month>03</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>6</volume><issue>1</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en"/><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><issue-title xml:lang="zh"/><fpage>46</fpage><lpage>62</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2024-06-17"><day>17</day><month>06</month><year>2024</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2024-10-24"><day>24</day><month>10</month><year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2025, Eco-Vector</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2025, Эко-вектор</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="zh">Copyright ©; 2025, Eco-Vector</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2025</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Eco-Vector</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Эко-вектор</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="zh">Eco-Vector</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://jdigitaldiagnostics.com/DD/article/view/633487">https://jdigitaldiagnostics.com/DD/article/view/633487</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer following radical treatment, including radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy, occurs in approximately 25%–50% of patients. However, the clinical course and prognosis of the disease vary among patients and depend on several factors. Consequently, the optimal diagnostic and treatment methods for patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer remains debatable. Biochemical recurrence may be caused by local recurrence, metastatic dissemination, or a combination of these processes. Recently, approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer have undergone significant changes with the introduction of more accurate diagnostic methods. This article provides a review of the current capabilities of radiological imaging and radionuclide diagnostic methods in visualizing local recurrence and metastases in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Биохимический рецидив рака предстательной железы возникает приблизительно в 25–50% случаев среди пациентов после его радикального лечения, как после радикальной простатэктомии, так и после лучевой терапии. Однако клиническое течение и прогноз заболевания у разных пациентов с биохимическим рецидивом рака предстательной железы существенно отличаются и зависят от целого ряда факторов. В связи с этим оптимальный алгоритм диагностики и лечения пациентов с биохимическим рецидивом рака предстательной железы до настоящего времени является предметом научных споров. Причиной биохимического рецидива рака предстательной железы может быть как локальный рецидив, так и метастатическая диссеминация, а также сочетание этих процессов. В последние годы подходы к диагностике и лечению пациентов с биохимическим рецидивом рака предстательной железы претерпели существенные изменения в связи с внедрением в клиническую практику более точных методов диагностики. В статье представлен обзор литературных данных о современных возможностях методов лучевой и радионуклидной диагностики при визуализации местного рецидива и метастазов рака предстательной железы у пациентов с биохимическим рецидивом.</p></trans-abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="zh"><p>前列腺癌的生化复发发生在大约25%–50%的患者中，这些患者在接受前列腺癌的根治性治疗后，包括根治性前列腺切除术和放射治疗。然而，生化复发前列腺癌患者的临床过程和预后差异显著，具体情况取决于多个因素。因此，生化复发前列腺癌的最佳诊断和治疗方案至今仍是学术界争论的焦点。生化复发的原因可能是局部复发、转移性扩散或两者结合。近年来，随着更加精确的诊断方法的临床应用，生化复发前列腺癌患者的诊断和治疗方法发生了显著变化。本文回顾了当前关于生化复发前列腺癌患者中局部复发和转移灶影像学的放射学和核素影像学方法的文献数据。</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>prostate cancer</kwd><kwd>biochemical recurrence</kwd><kwd>prostate-specific membrane antigen</kwd><kwd>combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography</kwd><kwd>combined positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>рак предстательной железы</kwd><kwd>биохимический рецидив</kwd><kwd>простатоспецифичный мембранный антиген</kwd><kwd>совмещённая позитронно-эмиссионная и компьютерная томография</kwd><kwd>совмещённая позитронно-эмиссионная и магнитно-резонансная томография</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="zh"><kwd>前列腺癌</kwd><kwd>生化复发</kwd><kwd>前列腺特异性膜抗原</kwd><kwd>电子发射计算机断层扫描</kwd><kwd>电子发射磁共振成像</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Kaprin AD, Starinsky VV, Shakhzadova AO, editors. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2021 (morbidity and mortality). Moscow: P. Herzen MORI — the branch of the FSBI NMRRC of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2022. (In Russ).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Suardi N, Porter CR, Reuther AM, et al. A nomogram predicting long-term biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2008;112(6):1254–1263. doi: 10.1002/cncr.23293</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association prostate guidelines for localized prostate cancer update panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007;177(2):540–545. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.097</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Radical prostatectomy: long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function ("trifecta"). Urology. 2005;66 Suppl. 5:83–94. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.116</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Eggener SE, Scardino PT, Walsh PC, et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;185(3):869–875. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.057</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Bolla M, van Poppel H, Tombal B, et al.; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Radiation Oncology and Genito-Urinary Groups. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: long-term results of a randomised controlled trial (EORTC trial 22911). Lancet. 2012;380(9858): 2018–2027. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61253-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, Mangold LA, et al. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2005;294(4): 433–439. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.4.433</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Van den Broeck T, van den Bergh RCN, Arfi N, et al. Prognostic value of biochemical recurrence following treatment with curative intent for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2019;75(6):967–987. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.011 EDN: QVRVNR</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Roach M 3rd, Hanks G, Thames H Jr, et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65(4):965–974. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.04.029</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Roberts WB, Han M. Clinical significance and treatment of biochemical recurrence after definitive therapy for localized prostate cancer. Surg Oncol. 2009;18(3):268–274. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2009.02.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenberger MA, et al. Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 1999;281(17):1591–1597. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.17.1591</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Zagars GK, Pollack A. Kinetics of serum prostate-specific antigen after external beam radiation for clinically localized prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 1997;44(3):213–221. doi: 10.1016/s0167-8140(97)00123-0 EDN: AIKIJT</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Jhaveri FM, Klein EA. How to explore the patient with a rising PSA after radical prostatectomy: defining local versus systemic failure. Semin Urol Oncol. 1999;17(3):130–134.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Yossepowitch O, Briganti A, Eastham JA, et al. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and contemporary update. European urology. 2014;65(2):303–313. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.07.039</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Patel A, Dorey F, Franklin J, deKernion JB. Recurrence patterns after radical retropubic prostatectomy: clinical usefulness of prostate specific antigen doubling times and log slope prostate specific antigen. The Journal of urology. 1997;158(4):1441–1445. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)64238-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–629. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003 EDN: YUXBLF</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Tilki D, Preisser F, Graefen M, et al. External validation of the European Association of Urology biochemical recurrence risk groups to predict metastasis and mortality after radical prostatectomy in a European cohort. Eur Urol. 2019;75(6):896–900. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.03.016</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Morgan TM, Boorjian SA, Buyyounouski MK, et al. Salvage therapy for prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline part I: introduction and treatment decision-making at the time of suspected biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2024;211(4):509–517. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003892 EDN: ONOLYZ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, 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):243–262. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042 EDN: ESJJKR</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Zaorsky NG, Calais J, Fanti S, et al. Salvage therapy for prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Nat Rev Urol. 2021;18(11):643–668. doi: 10.1038/s41585-021-00497-7 EDN: CIPPVD</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Stish BJ, Pisansky TM, Harmsen WS, et al. Improved metastasis-free and survival outcomes with early salvage radiotherapy in men with detectable prostate-specific antigen after prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Journal of clinical oncology. 2016;34(32):3864–3871. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.3425</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>Abugharib A, Jackson WC, Tumati V, et al. Very early salvage radiotherapy improves distant metastasis-free survival. The Journal of urology. 2017;197(3 Pt 1):662–668. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.106</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>Pisansky TM, Agrawal S, Hamstra DA, et al. Salvage radiation therapy dose response for biochemical failure of prostate cancer after prostatectomy — A multi-institutional observational study. International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. 2016;96(5):1046–1053. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.08.043</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, et al. Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: impact on metastasis and survival. J Urol. 2009;182(6):2708–2714. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.027</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation>Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, et al. Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10260):1413–1421. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31553-1 EDN: WJNRRN</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation>Wiegel T, Lohm G, Bottke D, et al. Achieving an undetectable PSA after radiotherapy for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy is an independent predictor of biochemical outcome-results of a retrospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73(4):1009–1016. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.06.1922</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><mixed-citation>Trock BJ, Han M, Freedland SJ, et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival following salvage radiotherapy vs observation in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2008;299(23):2760–2769. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.23.2760 EDN: MLCBHB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation>Valle LF, Lehrer EJ, Markovic D, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of local salvage therapies after radiotherapy for prostate cancer (MASTER). Eur Urol. 2021;80(3)280–292. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.010 EDN: EZFEBO</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation>Beresford MJ, Gillatt D, Benson RJ, Ajithkumar T. A systematic review of the role of imaging before salvage radiotherapy for post-prostatectomy biochemical recurrence. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2010. Vol. 22, N. 1. P. 46–55. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2009.10.015</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation>Abuzallouf S, Dayes I, Lukka H. Baseline staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a summary of the literature. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2122–2127. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000123981.03084.06</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B31"><label>31.</label><mixed-citation>O'Sullivan GJ, Carty FL, Cronin CG. Imaging of bone metastasis: an update. World J Radiol. 2015;7(8):202–211. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v7.i8.202</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B32"><label>32.</label><mixed-citation>Kane CJ, Amling CL, Johnstone PA, et al. Limited value of bone scintigraphy and computed tomography in assessing biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2003;61(3):607–611. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02411-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B33"><label>33.</label><mixed-citation>Gabriele D, Collura D, Oderda M, et al. Is there still a role for computed tomography and bone scintigraphy in prostate cancer staging? An analysis from the EUREKA-1 database. World J Urol. 2016;34(4):517–523. doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1669-2 EDN: WUPIZJ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B34"><label>34.</label><mixed-citation>Krause BJ, Souvatzoglou M, Tuncel M, et al. The detection rate of [11C]Choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(1):18–23. doi: 10.1007/s00259-007-0581-4 EDN: DRDVCM</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B35"><label>35.</label><mixed-citation>Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol. 2019;76(3):340–351. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B36"><label>36.</label><mixed-citation>Cirillo S, Petracchini M, Scotti L, et al. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 Tesla to assess local recurrence following radical prostatectomy using T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced imaging. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(3):761–769. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1174-8 EDN: ZGZGFV</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B37"><label>37.</label><mixed-citation>Hernandez D, Salas D, Giménez D, et al. Pelvic MRI findings in relapsed prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Radiat Oncol. 2015;10:262. doi: 10.1186/s13014-015-0574-6 EDN: XDYQIJ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B38"><label>38.</label><mixed-citation>Kwon T, Kim JK, Lee C, et al. Discrimination of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Prostate Int. 2018;6(1):12–17. doi: 10.1016/j.prnil.2017.05.002 EDN: YCZHET</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B39"><label>39.</label><mixed-citation>Panebianco V, Barchetti F, Sciarra A, et al. Prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy: the role of 3-T diffusion imaging in multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(6):1745–1752. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2768-3 EDN: WABISI</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B40"><label>40.</label><mixed-citation>Breen WG, Stish BJ, Harmsen WS, et al. The prognostic value, sensitivity, and specificity of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2021;161:9–15. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.05.015 EDN: AXVJZF</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B41"><label>41.</label><mixed-citation>Dirix P, van Walle L, Deckers F, et al. Proposal for magnetic resonance imaging-guided salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(1):27–32. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2016.1223342 EDN: YWOCNJ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B42"><label>42.</label><mixed-citation>Renard-Penna R, Zhang-Yin J, Montagne S, et al. Targeting local recurrence after surgery with MRI imaging for prostate cancer in the setting of salvage radiation therapy. Front Oncol. 2022;12:775387. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.775387 EDN: FQGODQ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B43"><label>43.</label><mixed-citation>Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al.; proPSMA Study Group Collaborators. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395(10231):1208–1216. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7 EDN: IDQIFB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B44"><label>44.</label><mixed-citation>Buergy D, Sertdemir M, Weidner A, et al. Detection of local recurrence with 3-Tesla MRI after radical prostatectomy: a useful method for radiation treatment planning? In Vivo. 2018;32(1):125–131. doi: 10.21873/invivo.11214 EDN: YEIKJV</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B45"><label>45.</label><mixed-citation>Sharma V, Nehra A, Colicchia M, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging is an independent predictor of salvage radiotherapy outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2018;73(6):879–887. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.11.012</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B46"><label>46.</label><mixed-citation>Hövels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(4):387–395. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2007.05.022</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B47"><label>47.</label><mixed-citation>Toussi A, Stewart-Merrill SB, Boorjian SA, et al. Standardizing the definition of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy-what prostate specific antigen cut point best predicts a durable increase and subsequent systemic progression? J Urol. 2016;195(6):1754–1759. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.075 EDN: WPXQUN</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B48"><label>48.</label><mixed-citation>Luboldt W, Küfer R, Blumstein N, et al. Prostate carcinoma: diffusion-weighted imaging as potential alternative to conventional MR and 11C-choline PET/CT for detection of bone metastases. Radiology. 2008;249(3):1017–1025. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2492080038</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B49"><label>49.</label><mixed-citation>Van Nieuwenhove S, Van Damme J, Padhani AR, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer assessment: current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022;55(3):653–680. doi: 10.1002/jmri.27485</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B50"><label>50.</label><mixed-citation>Nakanishi K, Tanaka J, Nakaya Y, et al. Whole-body MRI: detecting bone metastases from prostate cancer. Jpn J Radiol. 2022;40(3):229–244. doi: 10.1007/s11604-021-01205-6 EDN: QZBDSB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B51"><label>51.</label><mixed-citation>Deliveliotis C, Manousakas T, Chrisofos M, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostatic fossa in patients with rising PSA following radical prostatectomy. World J Urol. 2007;25(3):309–313. doi: 10.1007/s00345-007-0167-6 EDN: JCMCNS</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B52"><label>52.</label><mixed-citation>Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of (68)Gallium-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):1436–1443. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.025</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B53"><label>53.</label><mixed-citation>de Galiza Barbosa F, Queiroz MA, Nunes RF, et al. Nonprostatic diseases on PSMA PET imaging: a spectrum of benign and malignant findings. Cancer Imaging. 2020;20(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s40644-020-00300-7 EDN: TKHPXT</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B54"><label>54.</label><mixed-citation>Jadvar H, Calais J, Fanti S, et al. Appropriate Use Criteria for Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET Imaging. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(1):59–68. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.121.263262 EDN: PBEQSJ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B55"><label>55.</label><mixed-citation>Rahbar K, Weckesser M, Ahmadzadehfar H, et al. Advantage of 18F-PSMA-1007 over 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging for differentiation of local recurrence vs. urinary tracer excretion. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(6):1076–1077. doi: 10.1007/s00259-018-3952-0 EDN: SGKOZF</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B56"><label>56.</label><mixed-citation>Behr SC, Aggarwal R, Van Brocklin HF, et al. Phase I study of CTT1057, an 18F-labeled imaging agent with phosphoramidate core targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen in prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(7):910–916. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.118.220715 2018</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B57"><label>57.</label><mixed-citation>Duan H, Song H, Davidzon GA, et al. Prospective comparison of 68Ga-NeoB and 68Ga-PSMA-R2 PET/MRI in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2024;65(6):897–903. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.123.267017 EDN: GUNGVG</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B58"><label>58.</label><mixed-citation>PROPELLER trial results – SAR-bisPSMA safe, well tolerated and efficacious in the detection of prostate cancer; [about 3 screens]. In: Clarity Pharmaceuticals [Internet]. Eveleigh: National Innovation Centre, 2023–2024 [cited 2024 Dec 19]. Available from: https://www.claritypharmaceuticals.com/news/propeller_results/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B59"><label>59.</label><mixed-citation>Nielsen JB, Zacho HD, Haberkorn U, et al. A comprehensive safety evaluation of 68Ga-Labeled ligand prostate-specific membrane antigen 11 PET/CT in prostate cancer: the results of 2 rospective, multicenter trials. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42(7):520–524. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000001681</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B60"><label>60.</label><mixed-citation>Sanchez-Crespo A. Comparison of Gallium-68 and Fluorine-18 imaging characteristics in positron emission tomography. Appl Radiat Isot. 2013;76:55–62. doi: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2012.06.034</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B61"><label>61.</label><mixed-citation>Dietlein M, Kobe C, Kuhnert G, et al. Comparison of [(18)F]DCFPyL and [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET imaging in patients with relapsed prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17(4):575–584. doi: 10.1007/s11307-015-0866-0 EDN: NUSIQH</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B62"><label>62.</label><mixed-citation>Dietlein F, Kobe C, Neubauer S, et al. PSA-Stratified Performance of 18F- and 68Ga-PSMA PET in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(6):947–952. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.185538</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B63"><label>63.</label><mixed-citation>Kim JH, Lee JS, Kim JS, et al. Physical performance comparison of Ga-68 and F-18 in small animal PET system. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1423.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B64"><label>64.</label><mixed-citation>Rohith G. VISION trial: 177Lu-PSMA-617 for progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Indian J Urol. 2021;37(4):372–373. doi: 10.4103/iju.iju_292_21 EDN: YAFNKB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B65"><label>65.</label><mixed-citation>Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, et al. Assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy in localizing recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(6):856–863. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0096</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B66"><label>66.</label><mixed-citation>Boreta L, Gadzinski AJ, Wu SY, et al. Location of recurrence by Gallium-68 PSMA-11 PET scan in prostate cancer patients eligible for salvage radiotherapy. Urology. 2019;129:165–171. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.12.055</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B67"><label>67.</label><mixed-citation>Calais J, Czernin J, Cao M, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT mapping of prostate cancer biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in 270 patients with a PSA level of less than 1.0 ng/mL: impact on salvage radiotherapy planning. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(2):230–237. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.201749</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B68"><label>68.</label><mixed-citation>Ignatova MV, Tlostanova MS, Stranzhevsky AA. The first experience of performing combined positronemission with computed tomography with prostate-specific membrane antigen labeled with gallium-68 in patients with minimal level of prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy. Problems in oncology. 2018;64(4):508–514. doi: 10.37469/0507-3758-2018-64-4-508-514 EDN: YMJZRB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B69"><label>69.</label><mixed-citation>Sawicki LM, Kirchner J, Buddensieck C, et al. Prospective comparison of whole-body MRI and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for the detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46(7):1542–1550. doi: 10.1007/s00259-019-04308-5 EDN: OQFCIB</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B70"><label>70.</label><mixed-citation>Meshcheriakova NA, Dolgushin MB, Pronin AI, et al. 18F-PSMA-1007 and 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT in prostate cancer progression diagnostics. First comparative experience. Cancer Urology. 2019;15(3):70–76. doi: 10.17650/1726-9776-2019-15-3-70-76 EDN: ZZTJTZ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B71"><label>71.</label><mixed-citation>Rouvière O, Vitry T, Lyonnet D. Imaging of prostate cancer local recurrences: why and how? Eur Radiol. 2010;20(5):1254–1266. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1647-4</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B72"><label>72.</label><mixed-citation>Liu W, Fakir H, Randhawa G, et al. Defining radio-recurrent intra-prostatic target volumes using PSMA-targeted PET/CT and multi-parametric MRI. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2021;32:41–47. doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.11.006 EDN: NBASST</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B73"><label>73.</label><mixed-citation>Rasing M, van Son M, Moerland M, et al. Value of targeted biopsies and combined PSMA PET/CT and mp-MRI imaging in locally recurrent prostate cancer after primary radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(3):781. doi: 10.3390/cancers14030781 EDN: POUONH</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B74"><label>74.</label><mixed-citation>Albalooshi B, Al Sharhan M, Bagheri F, et al. Direct comparison of 99mTc-PSMA SPECT/CT and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol. 2020;8(1):1–7. doi: 10.22038/aojnmb.2019.43943.1293</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B75"><label>75.</label><mixed-citation>Lawal IO, Ankrah AO, Mokgoro NP, et al. 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):1205–1212. doi: 10.1002/pros.23379</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B76"><label>76.</label><mixed-citation>De Bari B, Mazzola R, Aiello D, et al. Could 68-Ga PSMA PET/CT become a new tool in the decision-making strategy of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence of PSA after radical prostatectomy? A preliminary, monocentric series. Radiol med. 2018;123(9):719–725. doi: 10.1007/s11547-018-0890-7 EDN: UOCNNY</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B77"><label>77.</label><mixed-citation>Meijer D, Eppinga WSC, Mohede RM, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography is associated with improved oncological outcome in men treated with salvage radiation therapy for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol. 2022;5(2):146–152. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.01.001 EDN: EJCJZQ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B78"><label>78.</label><mixed-citation>Steuber T, Jilg C, Tennstedt P, et al. Standard of care versus metastases-directed therapy for PET-detected nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer following multimodality treatment: a multi-institutional case-control study. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(6):1007–1013. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.02.015 EDN: GGXATS</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B79"><label>79.</label><mixed-citation>Ost P, Reynders D, Decaestecker K, et al. Surveillance or metastasis-directed therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer recurrence: a prospective, randomized, multicenter phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(5):446–453. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.4853 EDN: YFTYOT</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B80"><label>80.</label><mixed-citation>Domachevsky L, Bernstine H, Goldberg N, et al. Early 68GA-PSMA PET/MRI acquisition: assessment of lesion detectability and PET metrics in patients with prostate cancer undergoing same-day late PET/CT. Clin Radiol. 2017;72(11):944–950. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.06.116</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B81"><label>81.</label><mixed-citation>Muehlematter UJ, Burger IA, Becker AS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI versus 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET–MRI for extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion in patients with prostate cancer. Radiology. 2019;293(2):350–358. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190687 EDN: KWPAPG</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B82"><label>82.</label><mixed-citation>Rauscher I, Maurer T, Beer AJ, et al. Value of 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET for the assessment of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: comparison with histopathology after salvage lymphadenectomy. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(11):1713–1719. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.173492</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B83"><label>83.</label><mixed-citation>Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Hadaschik BA, et al. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA PET–MRI and (68)Ga-PSMA PET–CT in the evaluation of lymph node and bone metastases of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(1):70–83. doi: 10.1007/s00259-015-3206-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B84"><label>84.</label><mixed-citation>Domachevsky L, Bernstine H, Goldberg N, et al. Comparison between pelvic PSMA-PET/MR and whole-body PSMA-PET/CT for the initial evaluation of prostate cancer: a proof of concept study. Eur Radiol. 2020;30(1):328–336. doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06353-y EDN: KMSBPG</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B85"><label>85.</label><mixed-citation>Guberina N, Hetkamp P, Ruebben H, et al. Whole-Body Integrated [68Ga]PSMA-11-PET/MR imaging in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: comparison with whole-body PET/CT as the standard of reference. Mol Imaging Biol. 2020;22(3):788–796. doi: 10.1007/s11307-019-01424-4 EDN: JFXPCT</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B86"><label>86.</label><mixed-citation>Hammer BE, Christensen NL, Heil BG Use of a magnetic field to increase the spatial resolution of positron emission tomography. Med Phys. 1994;21(12):1917–1920. doi: 10.1118/1.597178</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B87"><label>87.</label><mixed-citation>Lütje S, Cohnen J, Gomez B, et al. Integrated 68Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA-PET/MRI in patients with suspected recurrent prostate cancer. Nuklearmedizin. 2017;56(3):73–81. doi: 10.3413/Nukmed-0850-16-09 EDN: YHZYJI</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B88"><label>88.</label><mixed-citation>Glemser PA, Rotkopf LT, Ziener CH. et al. Hybrid imaging with [68Ga]PSMA-11 PET-CT and PET-MRI in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Cancer Imaging. 2022;22(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s40644-022-00489-9 EDN: RWPVCM</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B89"><label>89.</label><mixed-citation>Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II-2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):263–282. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.046 EDN: DIYUWG</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B90"><label>90.</label><mixed-citation>Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, et al. NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2024;22(3):140–150. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2024.0019 EDN: FGJHUU</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B91"><label>91.</label><mixed-citation>Kanesvaran R, Castro E, Wong A, et al. Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with prostate cancer. ESMO Open. 2022;7(4):100518. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100518 EDN: XMNZIQ</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B92"><label>92.</label><mixed-citation>Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, et al. False positive PSMA PET for tumor remnants in the irradiated prostate and other interpretation pitfalls in a prospective multi-center trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(2):501–508. doi: 10.1007/s00259-020-04945-1 EDN: LCAVNA</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B93"><label>93.</label><mixed-citation>Chen MY, Franklin A, Yaxley J, et al. Solitary rib lesions showing prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) uptake in pre-treatment staging 68 Ga-PSMA-11 positron emission tomography scans for men with prostate cancer: benign or malignant? BJU Int. 2020;126(3):396–401. doi: 10.1111/bju.15152 EDN: ZWDNWL</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B94"><label>94.</label><mixed-citation>Hofman MS, Hicks RJ, Maurer T, Eiber M. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET: clinical utility in prostate cancer, normal patterns, pearls, and pitfalls. Radiographics. 2018;38(1):200–217. doi: 10.1148/rg.2018170108 EDN: VDZCOY</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B95"><label>95.</label><mixed-citation>Eiber M, Herrmann K, Calais J, 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):469–478. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.198119 EDN: YHZFXV</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B96"><label>96.</label><mixed-citation>Rowe SP, Pienta KJ, Pomper MG, Gorin MA. Proposal for a structured reporting system for prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted PET imaging: PSMA-RADS Version 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(30):479–485. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.195255</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
