Pietro Pepe

Prof. Dr. Pietro Pepe


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2013 in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
FAFrancesco Aragona
Francesco Aragona

1 October 2006 in European Journal of Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
PPPaolo Panella
Paolo Panella
MPMichele Pennisi
Michele Pennisi
FAFrancesco Aragona
Francesco Aragona

1 February 2017 in Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
AGAntonio Garufi
Antonio Garufi
GPGiandomenico Priolo
Giandomenico Priolo
MPMichele Pennisi
Michele Pennisi

1 December 2007 in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
FAFrancesco Aragona
Francesco Aragona

1 October 2018 in Journal of Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
AGAntonio Garufi
Antonio Garufi
GPGian Domenico Priolo
Gian Domenico Priolo
AGAntonio Galia
Antonio Galia
FFFilippo Fraggetta
Filippo Fraggetta
MPMichele Pennisi
Michele Pennisi
We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer and compared it with the diagnostic accuracy of transperineal saturation prostate biopsy. From January 2011 to February 2018 repeat saturation prostate biopsy (the reference test) was done due to suspicion of cancer in 1,032 men with a median age of 63 years in whom median prostate specific antigen was 8.6 ng/ml. All patients underwent 3.0 Tesla pelvic multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before saturation prostate biopsy. Additional targeted fusion prostate biopsy was done of lesions with a PI-RADS™ (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) score of 3 or greater. T1c prostate cancer was found in 372 of the 1,032 patients (36%). Of these cases 272 (73.1%) were classified as clinically significant prostate cancer. Saturation prostate biopsy vs targeted fusion prostate biopsy and a PI-RADS score of 3 or greater vs targeted fusion prostate biopsy and a PI-RADS score of 4 or greater diagnosed 95.6% vs 83.8% vs 60.3% of clinically significant prostate cancers (p <0.0001). Saturation prostate biopsy missed 12 of 272 clinically significant prostate cancers (4.5%) vs 44 (16.2%) and 108 of 272 (39.7%) missed by targeted fusion prostate biopsy and a PI-RADS score of 3 or greater and a score of 4 or greater, respectively (p <0.0001). As a triage test multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging would have spared 49.3% vs 73.6% of patients using a PI-RADS cutoff of 3 or greater vs 4 or greater. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging could significantly reduce the number of unnecessary repeat prostate biopsies in about 50% of cases in which a PI-RADS score of 3 or greater is used. At the same time patients should be informed of the 16.2% and 39.7% false-negative rates of clinically significant prostate cancer for targeted fusion prostate biopsy of PI-RADS 3 or greater and 4 or greater lesions, respectively.

27 April 2023 in In Vivo
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PPPietro Pepe
Pietro Pepe
LPLudovica Pepe
Ludovica Pepe
MTMaria Tamburo
Maria Tamburo
GMGiulia Marletta
Giulia Marletta
FSFrancesco Savoca
Francesco Savoca
FFFilippo Fraggetta
Filippo Fraggetta
Background/Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer (PCa). Patients and Methods: From January 2021 to December 2022, 160 men (median age: 66 years) with PCa (median PSA of 11.7 ng/ml) before prostate biopsy underwent 68Ga-PET/CT imaging examinations (Biograph 6; Siemens, Knoxville, TN, USA). The location of focal uptake on 68Ga-PSMA PET/TC and standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were reported on a per-lesion basis for each International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) PCa. Results: Overall, the median intraprostatic 68Ga-PSMA SUVmax was 26.1 (range=2.7-164); in the 15 men with not clinically significant PCa (ISUP grade group 1) median SUVmax was 7.5 (range=2.7-12.5). In the 145 men with csPCa (ISUP GG≥2) median SUVmax was 33 (range=7.8-164). A SUVmax cut-off of 8 demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of PCa equal to 87.7% vs. 89.3% vs. 100% in the presence of a GG1 vs. GG2 vs. GG≥3 PCa, respectively. In addition, median SUVmax in the bone and node metastases was 52.7 (range=25.3-92.8) and 47 (range=24.5-65), respectively. Conclusion: 68GaPSMA PET/CT with a SUVmax cut-off of 8 demonstrated a good accuracy in the diagnosis of csPCa (100% in the presence of GG≥3) showing a good cost-benefit ratio as a single procedure for the diagnosis and staging of high-risk PCa.