<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Lawal IO</submitter><funding>NIDCD NIH HHS</funding><funding>NCI NIH HHS</funding><pagination>e153-e159</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9992149</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>48(4)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Purpose&lt;/h4>We aimed to evaluate the impact of 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging on failure-free survival (FFS) post-salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) recurrence.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Seventy-nine patients were recruited in a phase 2/3 clinical trial to undergo 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT before SRT for PCa. Four patients with extrapelvic disease were excluded. All patients were followed up at regular intervals up to 48 months. Treatment failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level of ≥0.2 ng/mL above the nadir after SRT, confirmed with an additional measurement, requiring systemic treatment or clinical progression. Failure-free survival was computed and compared between patients grouped according to 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging findings.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Eighty percent (60/75) of patients had a positive finding on 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT, of which 56.7% (34/60) had prostate bed-only uptake, whereas 43.3% (26/60) had pelvic nodal ± bed uptake. Following SRT, disease failure was detected in 36% (27/75) of patients. There was a significant difference in FFS between patients who had a positive versus negative scan (62.3% vs 92.9% [ P &lt; 0.001] at 36 months and 59.4% vs 92.9% [ P &lt; 0.001] at 48 months). Similarly, there was a significant difference in FFS between patients with uptake in pelvic nodes ± bed versus prostate bed only at 36 months (49.8% vs 70.7%; P = 0.003) and at 48 months (49.8% vs 65.6%; P = 0.040). Failure-free survival was also significantly higher in patients with either negative PET/CT or prostate bed-only disease versus those with pelvic nodal ± prostate bed disease at 36 (78% vs 49.8%, P &lt; 0.001) and 48 months (74.4% vs 49.8%, P &lt; 0.001).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Findings on pre-SRT 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging, even when acted upon to optimize the treatment decisions and treatment planning, are predictive of post-SRT FFS in men who experience PCa recurrence after radical prostatectomy. A negative 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT is most predictive of a lower risk of failure, whereas the presence of pelvic nodal recurrence portends a higher risk of SRT failure.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Clinical nuclear medicine</journal><pubmed_title>Impact of 18 F-Fluciclovine PET/CT Findings on Failure-Free Survival in Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer Following Salvage Radiation Therapy.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9992149</pmcid><funding_grant_id>R01 CA169188</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 DC016918</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Joshi SS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Master VA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shelton JW</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Halkar RK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Goodman M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Fielder B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Adediran OA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dhere VR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Marcus C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Abiodun-Ojo OA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Goyal S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Patel PR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lawal IO</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hershatter B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kucuk O</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schuster DM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jani AB</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Impact of 18 F-Fluciclovine PET/CT Findings on Failure-Free Survival in Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer Following Salvage Radiation Therapy.</name><description>&lt;h4>Purpose&lt;/h4>We aimed to evaluate the impact of 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging on failure-free survival (FFS) post-salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for prostate cancer (PCa) recurrence.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Seventy-nine patients were recruited in a phase 2/3 clinical trial to undergo 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT before SRT for PCa. Four patients with extrapelvic disease were excluded. All patients were followed up at regular intervals up to 48 months. Treatment failure was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level of ≥0.2 ng/mL above the nadir after SRT, confirmed with an additional measurement, requiring systemic treatment or clinical progression. Failure-free survival was computed and compared between patients grouped according to 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging findings.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Eighty percent (60/75) of patients had a positive finding on 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT, of which 56.7% (34/60) had prostate bed-only uptake, whereas 43.3% (26/60) had pelvic nodal ± bed uptake. Following SRT, disease failure was detected in 36% (27/75) of patients. There was a significant difference in FFS between patients who had a positive versus negative scan (62.3% vs 92.9% [ P &lt; 0.001] at 36 months and 59.4% vs 92.9% [ P &lt; 0.001] at 48 months). Similarly, there was a significant difference in FFS between patients with uptake in pelvic nodes ± bed versus prostate bed only at 36 months (49.8% vs 70.7%; P = 0.003) and at 48 months (49.8% vs 65.6%; P = 0.040). Failure-free survival was also significantly higher in patients with either negative PET/CT or prostate bed-only disease versus those with pelvic nodal ± prostate bed disease at 36 (78% vs 49.8%, P &lt; 0.001) and 48 months (74.4% vs 49.8%, P &lt; 0.001).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Findings on pre-SRT 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging, even when acted upon to optimize the treatment decisions and treatment planning, are predictive of post-SRT FFS in men who experience PCa recurrence after radical prostatectomy. A negative 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT is most predictive of a lower risk of failure, whereas the presence of pelvic nodal recurrence portends a higher risk of SRT failure.</description><dates><release>2023-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2023 Apr</publication><modification>2026-05-28T22:00:15.619Z</modification><creation>2026-04-08T03:17:37.557Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9992149</accession><cross_references><pubmed>36754362</pubmed><doi>10.1097/rlu.0000000000004590</doi><doi>10.1097/RLU.0000000000004590</doi></cross_references></HashMap>