Correction to: Addition of quantitative imaging parameters to visual analysis improves the accuracy of PSMA PET/CT for the local staging of primary prostate cancer (European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, (2026), 10.1007/s00259-025-07757-3)

Abstract

The authors regret that the version of Tables 3, 6 and 7 that appeared in the original published article are incorrect. The correct and incorrect version of Tables 3, 6 and 7 are shown below. Below is the incorrect Table 3. Table 3. Comparison of PSMA PET/CT based visual analysis of local tumour stage and quantitative parameters in 223 evaluable patients according to pathological tumour (pT) stage after RARP Entire cohort pT2 ≥pT3 p-value (pT2 vs. ≥pT3) pT3a ³pT3b miT-stage (visual), n (%) miT2 95 (43%) 51 (23%) 30 (13%) 14 (6%) 0.02* ≥miT3 • Likert 1 62 (28%) 21 (9%) 25 (11%) 16 (7%) • Likert 2 66 (30%) 18 (8%) 22 (10%) 26 (12%) LCC mm, median (IQR) 16 (11–22) 13 (9–17) 16 (12–22) 20 (14–33) < 0.01* SUVmax median (IQR) 9.0 (6.3–15.7) 7.9 (6.2–12.5) 8.3 (5.6–16.1) 12.0 (8.0-17.1.0.1) 0.02* SUVpeak median (IQR) 6.6 (4.6–10.9) 5.6 (4.2–8.5) 6.3 (4.6–11.6) 8.9 (6.5–13.5) < 0.01* PSMA-vol, cm3, median (IQR) 4.2 (1.9–9.9) 3.1 (1.2–6.2) 4.2 (1.9-8.0.9.0) 8.9 (6.5–13.5) < 0.01* PSMA-TL median (IQR) 25.1 (8.9–60.2) 16.0 (6.1–36.4) 27.4 (8.7–52.3) 58.2 (22.9-172.5.9.5) < 0.01* mi = molecular imaging; LCC = longest capsule contact; SUV = standardised uptake value; PSMA-vol = PSMA PET based tumour volume; PSMA-TL = total lesion PSMA expression; *denotes significance at alpha.05 Below is the correct Table 3. Table 3. Comparison of PSMA PET/CT based visual analysis of local tumour stage and quantitative parameters in 223 evaluable patients according to pathological tumour (pT) stage after RARP Entire cohort pT2 ≥pT3 p-value (pT2 vs. ≥pT3) pT3a ≥pT3b miT-stage (visual), n (%) miT2 95 (43%) 51 (23%) 30 (13%) 14 (6%) 0.02* ≥miT3 • Likert 1 62 (28%) 21 (9%) 25 (11%) 16 (7%) • Likert 2 66 (30%) 18 (8%) 22 (10%) 26 (12%) LCC mm, median (IQR) 16 (11–22) 13 (9–17) 16 (12–22) 20 (14–33) < 0.01* SUVmax median (IQR) 9.0 (6.3–15.7) 7.9 (6.2–12.5) 8.3 (5.6–16.1) 12.0 (8.0-17.1) 0.02* SUVpeak median (IQR) 6.6 (4.6–10.9) 5.6 (4.2–8.5) 6.3 (4.6–11.6) 8.9 (6.5–13.5) < 0.01* PSMA-vol, cm3, median (IQR) 4.2 (1.9–9.9) 3.1 (1.2–6.2) 4.2 (1.9-8.0) 8.9 (6.5–13.5) < 0.01* PSMA-TL median (IQR) 25.1 (8.9–60.2) 16.0 (6.1–36.4) 27.4 (8.7–52.3) 58.2 (22.9-172.5) < 0.01* mi = molecular imaging; LCC = longest capsule contact; SUV = standardised uptake value; PSMA-vol = PSMA PET based tumour volume; PSMA-TL = total lesion PSMA expression; *denotes significance at alpha.05 Below is the incorrect Table 6. Table 6. Independent predictors from multivariable logistic regression analysis of PSMA PET/CT based visual analysis of local tumour stage (miT-stage) and quantitative parameters for pathological tumour stage (pT-stage) in 223 evaluable patients, regarding A. pT3a-stage; B. ≥pT3b-stage and C. ≥pT3-stage B SE Odds ratio [95% CI] p-value Model AUC [95% CI] A. pT3a-stage LCC 0.055 0.020 1.057 [1.015-1.100.015.100] < 0.01* 0.63 [0.55–0.72]† miT3b-stage (visual) 3.770 1.072 43.389 [5.308-354.642.308.642] < 0.01* LCC 0.047 0.022 1.048 [1.003–1.095] < 0.01* PSMA-vol 0.058 0.026 1.060 [1.007–1.116] < 0.01* 0.79 [0.72–0.87] LCC 0.056 0.021 1.058 [1.015–1.102] < 0.01* PSMA-vol 0.054 0.027 1.056 [1.000-1.114.000.114] 0.05* 0.70 [0.64–0.77] B = b-coefficient, SE= standard error for b-coefficient, CI= confidence interval, *denotes significance at alpha.05; †model consists of a single independent predictor Below is the correct Table 6. Table 6. Independent predictors from multivariable logistic regression analysis of PSMA PET/CT based visual analysis of local tumour stage (miT-stage) and quantitative parameters for pathological tumour stage (pT-stage) in 223 evaluable patients, regarding A. pT3a-stage; B. ≥pT3b-stage and C. ≥pT3-stage B SE Odds ratio [95% CI] p-value Model AUC [95% CI] A. pT3a-stage LCC 0.055 0.020 1.057 [1.015-1.100] < 0.01* 0.63 [0.55–0.72]† miT3b-stage (visual) 3.770 1.072 43.389 [5.308-354.642] < 0.01* LCC 0.047 0.022 1.048 [1.003–1.095] < 0.01* PSMA-vol 0.058 0.026 1.060 [1.007–1.116] < 0.01* 0.79 [0.72–0.87] LCC 0.056 0.021 1.058 [1.015–1.102] < 0.01* PSMA-vol 0.054 0.027 1.056 [1.000-1.114] 0.05* 0.70 [0.64–0.77] B = b-coefficient, SE= standard error for b-coefficient, CI= confidence interval, *denotes significance at alpha.05; †model consists of a single independent predictor Below is the incorrect Table 7. Table 7. Diagnostic accuracy of multivariable analysis-based clinical risk scores of PSMA PET/CT based miT-stage and quantitative parameters for A. pT3a-stage; B. ≥pT3b-stage and C. ≥pT3-stage A. pT3a-stage 33 17 50 39 29 68 ≥12 0.78 [0.68–0.86] 0.37 [0.27–0.47] 0.51 [0.42–0.60] 0.66 [0.52–0.78] 10 16 26 ≥18 0.40 [0.30–0.51] 0.80 [0.71–0.87] 0.63 [0.49–0.76] 0.61 [0.52–0.70] 8 15 23 ≥24 0.20 [0.12–0.29] 0.91 [0.84–0.96] 0.65 [0.45–0.82] 0.57 [0.49–0.65] Total; n 90 77 167 AUC 0.62 [95% CI 0.54–0.71] 67 5 72 66 12 78 ≥L-IR 0.91 [0.82–0.97] 0.40 [0.33–0.48] 0.34 [0.27–0.42] 0.93 [0.86–0.98] 33 30 63 ≥H-IR 0.70 [0.73–0.85] 0.80 [0.73–0.85] 0.53 [0.42–0.65] 0.89 [0.83–0.93] 1 9 10 ≥HR 0.16 [0.08–0.27] 0.99 [0.97-1.00.97.00] 0.90 [0.63–0.99] 0.74 [0.67–0.80] 167 56 223 AUC 0.79 [95% CI 0.72–0.86] Risk categories for ≥pT3b. LR, L-IR-, H-IR or HR in case of 0, 1, 2, or 3 positive criteria, respectively: miT3b-stage (visual), LCC ≥18mm, PSMA-vol ≥7cm3 45 27 72 33 52 85 ≥IR 0.80 [0.72–0.86] 0.50 [0.40–0.60] 0.70 [0.63–0.77] 0.63 [0.51–0.73] 12 54 66 ≥HR 0.41 [0.32–0.49] 0.87 [0.79–0.93] 0.82 [0.71–0.90] 0.50 [0.42–0.58] 90 133 223 AUC 0.70 [95% CI 0.63–0.77] Risk categories for ≥pT3. LR, IR-, or HR in case of 0, 1, or 2 positive criteria, respectively: LCC ≥18mm, PSMA-vol ≥3.3cm3 LR = low risk; IR = intermediate risk; L-IR = low-intermediate risk; H-IR = high-intermediate risk; HR = high risk; Risk calculated as n of pathological T3a/≥T3b/≥T3 cases divided per total n of cases within the specified risk category. Below is the correct Table 7. Table 7. Diagnostic accuracy of multivariable analysis-based clinical risk scores of PSMA PET/CT based miT-stage and quantitative parameters for A. pT3a-stage; B. ≥pT3b-stage and C. ≥pT3-stage A. pT3a-stage 33 17 50 39 29 68 ≥12 0.78 [0.68–0.86] 0.37 [0.27–0.47] 0.51 [0.42–0.60] 0.66 [0.52–0.78] 10 16 26 ≥18 0.40 [0.30–0.51] 0.80 [0.71–0.87] 0.63 [0.49–0.76] 0.61 [0.52–0.70] 8 15 23 ≥24 0.20 [0.12–0.29] 0.91 [0.84–0.96] 0.65 [0.45–0.82] 0.57 [0.49–0.65] Total; n 90 77 167 AUC 0.62 [95% CI 0.54–0.71] 67 5 72 66 12 78 ≥L-IR 0.91 [0.82–0.97] 0.40 [0.33–0.48] 0.34 [0.27–0.42] 0.93 [0.86–0.98] 33 30 63 ≥H-IR 0.70 [0.73–0.85] 0.80 [0.73–0.85] 0.53 [0.42–0.65] 0.89 [0.83–0.93] 1 9 10 ≥HR 0.16 [0.08–0.27] 0.99 [0.97-1.00] 0.90 [0.63–0.99] 0.74 [0.67–0.80] 167 56 223 AUC 0.79 [95% CI 0.72–0.86] Risk categories for ≥pT3b. LR, L-IR-, H-IR or HR in case of 0, 1, 2, or 3 positive criteria, respectively: miT3b-stage (visual), LCC ≥18mm, PSMA-vol ≥7cm3 45 27 72 33 52 85 ≥IR 0.80 [0.72–0.86] 0.50 [0.40–0.60] 0.70 [0.63–0.77] 0.63 [0.51–0.73] 12 54 66 ≥HR 0.41 [0.32–0.49] 0.87 [0.79–0.93] 0.82 [0.71–0.90] 0.50 [0.42–0.58] 90 133 223 AUC 0.70 [95% CI 0.63–0.77] Risk categories for ≥pT3. LR, IR-, or HR in case of 0, 1, or 2 positive criteria, respectively: LCC ≥18mm, PSMA-vol ≥3.3cm3 LR = low risk; IR = intermediate risk; L-IR = low-intermediate risk; H-IR = high-intermediate risk; HR = high risk; Risk calculated as n of pathological T3a/≥T3b/≥T3 cases divided per total n of cases within the specified risk category. The original article has been corrected. The original article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-025-07757-3.