Anti-PPV monoclonal antibody

Objective Differentiation of malignant and benign pancreatic lesions on anatomical imaging is difficult in some cases with overlapping features. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is overexpressed during angioneogenesis in many tumors. We aimed to evaluate the PSMA expression in pancreatic lesions to differentiate these lesions and explore the performance of Ga-68 PSMA-PET/CT vis-a-vis F-18 FDG-PET/CT. Methods Patients with pancreatic lesions on conventional imaging were prospectively recruited. All the patients underwent a whole-body F-18 FDG-PET/CT and a regional abdominal Ga-68 PSMA-PET/CT. Focal tracer uptake (FDG or PSMA) on PET images was considered positive. Histopathology and/or cytopathology were considered the reference standard. Results A total of forty patients (27 males, mean age 55.3 +/- 9.8, range 37-71 years) were enrolled. Of these, 19 were diagnosed as malignant on histopathology/cytology. Patients with benign lesions showed no worsening of symptoms for at least 6 months on follow-up. FDG-PET/CT revealed 17 true-positive (TP), 9 false-positive (FP), 12 true-negative (TN), and 2 false-negative (FN) findings, whereas PSMA-PET/CT had 18 TP, 2 FP, 19 TN, and 1 FN finding. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy for FDG-PET/CT were 89.5%, 57.1%, 65.4%, 85.7%, and 72.5%, respectively, while for PSMA-PET/CT were 94.7%, 90.5%, 90%, 95%, and 92.5%, respectively. ROC curve analysis showed that the SUVmax value of 4.8 on PSMA-PET/CT could predict the malignant potential of a lesion with a specificity of 90.5% and a sensitivity of 84.2%. Conclusions Ga-68 PSMA-PET/CT imaging helped in establishing a non-invasive pre-operative diagnosis of primary pancreatic malignancy with a higher degree of specificity and accuracy compared with FDG-PET/CT.

Background The collection of race, ethnicity, and language (REaL) data from patients is advocated as a first step to identify, monitor, and improve health inequities. As a result, many health care institutions collect patients' preferred languages in their electronic health records (EHRs). These data may be used in clinical care, research, and quality improvement. However, the accuracy of EHR language data are rarely assessed. Objectives This study aimed to audit the accuracy of EHR language data at two academic hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Methods The EHR language was compared with a patient's stated preferred language by interview. Language was dichotomized to English or non-English. Agreement between language documented in the EHR and patient-reported preferred language was calculated using sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV). Results A total of 323 patients were interviewed, including 96 with a stated non-English preferred language. The sensitivity of the EHR for English-language preference was high at both hospitals: 100% at hospital A with a PPV of 88%, and 99% at hospital B with a PPV of 85%. However, the sensitivity of the EHR for non-English preference differed greatly between the two hospitals. The sensitivity was 81% with a PPV of 100% at hospital A and the sensitivity was 12% with a PPV of 60% at hospital B. Conclusion The accuracy of the EHR for identifying non-English language preference differed greatly between the hospitals studied. Language data must be accurate for it to be used, and regular quality assurance is required.