Long-Term Follow-Up of Tamoxifen Treatment and the Use of Imaging in Psammocarcinoma: A Case Report, Review of the Literature and Discussion of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges.

Psammocarcinoma (PsC) represents a rare form of low-grade serous tumor of the ovary or peritoneum. Although ovarian cancer generally has a poor prognosis in its late stages, PsC seems to have a more indolent course. We present a patient with a history of unspecific abdominal pain for more than a year, with sudden acute onset of severe inguinal pain. On admission to the hospital, a computed tomography (CT) revealed a pelvic mass of suspected ovarian origin. Radical surgery was attempted but not achieved due to widespread tumor growth. Histopathological evaluation revealed estrogen receptor-positive stage III PsC. Tamoxifen treatment was thus initiated, still maintaining stable disease 10 years later. The patient has undergone extensive radiological work-up, including CT, chest X-ray, 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography (PET)/CT, 99mTc- hydroxymethylene diphosphonate (HDP) bone scintigraphy, 18F-fluoro-thymidine (FLT) PET/CT, Tc-99m depreotide scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging. In conclusion, we demonstrate that PsC has characteristic radiological features and different imaging modalities can be suitable in different clinical situations. In contrast to most other ovarian cancers, PsC does not always warrant adjuvant chemotherapy, even in advanced stages. This emphasizes the need for a deeper knowledge of the biological behavior of this rare tumor, to select the optimal treatment strategy.

Histopathology-validated lesion detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer with mpMRI, [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11-PET and [ 11 C]Acetate-PET.

OBJECTIVE: PET/CT and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) are important diagnostic tools in clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC). The aim of this study was to compare csPC detection rates with [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11-PET (PSMA)-PET, [ 11 C]Acetate (ACE)-PET, and mpMRI with histopathology as reference, to identify the most suitable imaging modalities for subsequent hybrid imaging. An additional aim was to compare inter-reader variability to assess reproducibility. METHODS: During 2016-2019, all study participants were examined with PSMA-PET/mpMRI and ACE-PET/CT prior to radical prostatectomy. PSMA-PET, ACE-PET and mpMRI were evaluated separately by two observers, and were compared with histopathology-defined csPC. Statistical analyses included two-sided McNemar test and index of specific agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-five study participants were included, with 130 histopathological intraprostatic lesions >0.05 cc. Of these, 32% (42/130) were classified as csPC with ISUP grade ≥2 and volume >0.5 cc. PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed no difference in performance ( P  = 0.48), with mean csPC detection rate of 70% (29.5/42) and 74% (31/42), respectively, while with ACE-PET the mean csPC detection rate was 37% (15.5/42). Interobserver agreement was higher with PSMA-PET compared to mpMRI [79% (26/33) vs 67% (24/38)]. Including all detected lesions from each pair of observers, the detection rate increased to 90% (38/42) with mpMRI, and 79% (33/42) with PSMA-PET. CONCLUSION: PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed high csPC detection rates and superior performance compared to ACE-PET. The interobserver agreement indicates higher reproducibility with PSMA-PET. The combined result of all observers in both PSMA-PET and mpMRI showed the highest detection rate, suggesting an added value of a hybrid imaging approach.