Objectives To systematically assess the early detection rate of biochemical prostate cancer recurrence using choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA. Methods Under the guidance of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis Diagnostic Test Accuracy guidelines, literature that assessed the detection rates (DRs) of choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA in prostate cancer biochemical recurrence was searched in PubMed and EMBASE databases for our systematic review from 2012 to July 15, 2021. In addition, the PSA-stratified performance of detection positivity was obtained to assess the DRs for various methods, including fluciclovine, PSMA, or choline PET/CT, with respect to biochemical recurrence based on different PSA levels. Results In total, 64 studies involving 11,173 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of the studies, 12, 7, and 48 focused on choline, fluciclovine, and PSMA, respectively. The pooled DRs were 24%, 37%, and 44%, respectively, for a PSA level less than 0.5 ng/mL (p < 0.001); 36%, 44%, and 60% for a PSA level of 0.5–0.99 ng/mL (p < 0.001); and 50%, 61%, and 80% for a PSA level of 1.0–1.99 ng/mL (p < 0.001). The DR with 18F-labeled PSMA was higher than that with 68Ga-labeled PSMA, and the DR was 58%, 72%, and 88% for PSA levels < 0.5 ng/mL, 0.5–0.9 ng/mL, and 1.0–1.99 ng/mL, respectively. Conclusion The DRs of PSMA-radiotracers were greater than those of choline-radiotracers and fluciclovine-radiotracers at the patient level. 18F-labeled PSMA achieved a higher DR than 68Ga-labeled PSMA. Key Points • The DRs of PSMA-radiotracers were greater than those of choline-radiotracers and fluciclovine-radiotracers at the patient level. •18F-labeled PSMA achieved a higher DR than68Ga-labeled PSMA.

Background: Existing evidence demonstrates that radiotherapy and antiangiogenic drugs have synergistic antitumour effects and may be a promising treatment option for patients with solid tumour. Thus, we performed a phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) combined with anlotinib for multiple brain metastases (BMs) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable driver mutations. Methods: Patients with multiple BMs (⩾3) from NSCLC without targetable driver mutations who failed to respond to at least first-line chemotherapy were enrolled. Eligible patients received WBRT (30 Gy/10 f, 5 f/week) and anlotinib (12 mg/day, day 1-14 of 21 days per cycle, 2 cycles) until disease progression or treatment intolerance. The primary endpoint was intracranial objective response rate (iORR) and secondary endpoints included intracranial progression-free survival (iPFS), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Between April 2019 and March 2021, 21 patients were enrolled in the trial, of which 12 were aged ⩾60 years (57.1%), 13 were men (61.9%), 7 had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 0 to 1 (81.0%), 18 had adenocarcinoma (85.7%), and 11 had ⩾6 BMs (52.4%). Of the 21 evaluable patients, the iORR was 66.7% (1 complete response + 13 partial response [PR]), and 28.6% (7PR) had extracerebral lesions. The DCRs for intracerebral and extracerebral lesions were 90.5% and 81.0%, respectively. The iPFS and OS were 10.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0-24.8 months) and 13.4 months (95% CI: 0-27.9 months), respectively. The most frequently observed toxicities were loss of appetite (61.9%), hypertension (52.4%), fatigue (47.6%), diarrhoea (28.6%), vomiting (19.0%), dizziness (42.9%), and headache (33.3%). None of the patients developed grade 4 or higher grade adverse reactions. Conclusions: Anlotinib combined with WBRT is effective and well tolerated in patients with multiple BMs (⩾3) from NSCLC without targetable driver mutations. Therefore, further validation studies are required. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR 1900027769

No abstract

Background. Both the tumor environment and the genomic landscape of lung cancer may shape patient responses to treatments, including immunotherapy, but their joint impacts on lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) prognosis are underexplored. Methods. RNA sequencing data and whole-exome sequencing results were downloaded from the TCGA database, and only LUAD-related data were included in this study. Based on gene expression data, the ESTIMATE algorithm was used to estimate stromal and immune scores, and CIBERSORT analysis was used for quantification of the relative abundances of immune cells. Somatic mutations were used for calculating tumor mutation burden (TMB). Specific mutations in genes involved in DNA damage repair (DDR) pathways were identified. The individual and joint associations of stromal and immune score, TMB, and DDR gene mutations with 5-year survival were analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier method and multivariate Cox model. Results. LUAD patients with a high (>highest 25%) stromal or immune score had prolonged survival as compared to those with a low (<lowest 25%) score (log-rank P = 0.05 and 0.035, respectively). Patients with both high stromal and immune scores had the most favorable survival. Although the survival differences between patients with high (>highest 25%) and low (<lowest 25%) TMB, or between patients with mutant- and wild-type DDR genes were not statistically significant, a survival benefit from high TMB or DDR gene mutations was observed in patients with high stromal or immune scores. Conclusion. A comprehensive evaluation of transcriptomic signatures and genomic biomarkers may provide a novel avenue for improving prognosis stratification in LUAD.

No abstract