Advertisement

Dynamic patterns of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 uptake in recurrent prostate cancer lesions

  • Ian AlbertsEmail author
  • Christos Sachpekidis
  • Eleni Gourni
  • Silvan Boxler
  • Tobias Gross
  • George Thalmann
  • Kambiz Rahbar
  • Axel Rominger
  • Ali Afshar-Oromieh
Original Article
  • 202 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Oncology – Genitourinary

Abstract

Purpose

Dual-time point PET/CT scanning with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) has been advanced as a method to increase detection of PC lesions, particularly at early stages of biochemical recurrence and as a potential means to aid the discrimination between benign and pathological prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) uptake. However, the assumption that all PC lesions uniformly exhibit increasing tracer uptake at delayed imaging has not yet been investigated, which this present study aims to address.

Methods

One hundred consecutive patients with biochemically recurrent PC who received standard and late [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT (by local protocol at 1.5 h “standard” and 2.5 h p.i. “late”) underwent retrospective evaluation. All lesions with a tracer uptake above local background were analysed with regard to their maximum standardised uptake values at standard and late images (SUVmax) and characterised according to their morphological characteristics.

Results

Seventy-nine of 100 patients had PSMA-positive scans, in whom a total of 185 individual PSMA-positive lesions were identified. These were morphologically characterised as bone lesions (n = 48), solid organ lesions (n = 3), lymph node (LN) lesions (n = 78) and locally recurrent lesions in the prostatic fossa or seminal vesicles (n = 56). The relative uptake between standard and late imaging was considered; all lesions classified as local recurrence presented with increasing (86%) or stable patterns of tracer uptake (14%). In contrast, only 58% of bone lesions exhibited increasing tracer uptake, with 21% exhibiting a stable pattern and 21% exhibiting a decreasing tracer uptake at late imaging.

Conclusion

A heterogeneous pattern of dynamic tracer uptake was observed, with a largely increasing pattern observed for locally recurrent lesions and lymph nodes and a significant proportion of bone lesions exhibiting decreasing tracer uptake. The results are of significance not only in the imaging and identification of PC lesions, but they also have implications for PSMA-directed ligand therapy.

Keywords

Prostate cancer PET/CT Positron emission tomography PSMA Prostate-specific membrane antigen Ganglion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This thesis forms part of the doctorial thesis of I Alberts.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All patients published in this manuscript signed a written informed consent form for the purpose of anonymised evaluation and the publication of their data. This evaluation was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Bern (KEK-Nr. 2018-00299).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

259_2019_4545_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 12 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:7–30.  https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21387.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fossati N, Karnes RJ, Colicchia M, Boorjian SA, Bossi A, Seisen T, et al. Impact of early salvage radiation therapy in patients with persistently elevated or rising prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.07.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Israeli RS, Powell CT, Corr JG, Fair WR, Heston WDW. Expression of the prostate-specific membrane antigen. Cancer Res. 1994;54:1807.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:11–20.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2525-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Holland-Letz T, Giesel FL, Kratochwil C, Mier W, Haufe S, et al. Diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: evaluation in 1007 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1258–68.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3711-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:668–74.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.154153.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:197–209.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Virgolini I, Decristoforo C, Haug A, Fanti S, Uprimny C. Current status of theranostics in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:471–95.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3882-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang SS. Overview of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Rev Urol. 2004;6:S13–S8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG, Hadaschik BA, et al. PET imaging with a [68Ga]gallium-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: biodistribution in humans and first evaluation of tumour lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:486–95.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-012-2298-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Sattler LP, Steiger K, Holland-Letz T, da Cunha ML, Mier W, et al. Tracer uptake in mediastinal and paraaortal thoracic lymph nodes as a potential pitfall in image interpretation of PSMA ligand PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:1179–87.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-3965-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krohn T, Verburg FA, Pufe T, Neuhuber W, Vogg A, Heinzel A, et al. [(68)Ga]PSMA-HBED uptake mimicking lymph node metastasis in coeliac ganglia: an important pitfall in clinical practice. Eur J NuclMed Mol Imaging. 2015;42:210–4.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2915-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Werner RA, Sheikhbahaei S, Jones KM, Javadi MS, Solnes LB, Ross AE, et al. Patterns of uptake of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted (18)F-DCFPyL in peripheral ganglia. Ann Nucl Med. 2017;31:696–702.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-017-1201-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kanthan GL, Hsiao E, Vu D, Schembri GP. Uptake in sympathetic ganglia on 68Ga-PSMA-HBED PET/CT: a potential pitfall in scan interpretation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2017;61:732–8.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12622.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hubble D, Robins P. RE: Uptake in sympathetic ganglia on 68Ga-PSMA-HBED PET/CT: a potential pitfall in scan interpretation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018;62:377–8.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12739.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rischpler C, Beck TI, Okamoto S, Schlitter AM, Knorr K, Schwaiger M, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC uptake in cervical, coeliac and sacral ganglia as an important pitfall in prostate cancer PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.204677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Sattler LP, Mier W, Hadaschik BA, Debus J, Holland-Letz T, et al. The clinical impact of additional late PET/CT imaging with (68)Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:750–5.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.183483.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kubler W, Kratochwil C, Giesel FL, Hope TA, et al. Radiation dosimetry of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) and preliminary evaluation of optimal imaging timing. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1611–20.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3419-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kratochwil C, Benesova M, Eder M, Neels OC, et al. The theranostic PSMA ligand PSMA-617 in the diagnosis of prostate cancer by PET/CT: biodistribution in humans, radiation dosimetry, and first evaluation of tumor lesions. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1697–705.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.161299.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eder M, Neels O, Muller M, Bauder-Wust U, Remde Y, Schafer M, et al. Novel preclinical and radiopharmaceutical aspects of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC: a new PET tracer for imaging of prostate cancer. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 7:779–96.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ph7070779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sachpekidis C, Baumer P, Kopka K, Hadaschik BA, Hohenfellner M, Kopp-Schneider A, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of bone metastases in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:904–12.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-3936-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lodge MA. Repeatability of SUV in oncologic (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:523–32.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.186353.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osborne JR, Kalidindi TM, Punzalan BJ, Gangangari K, Spratt DE, Weber WA, et al. Repeatability of [(68)Ga]DKFZ11-PSMA PET scans for detecting prostate-specific membrane antigen-positive prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2017;19:944–51.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-017-1091-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rahbar K, Afshar-Oromieh A, Seifert R, Wagner S, Schafers M, Bogemann M, et al. Diagnostic performance of (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in patients with biochemical recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:2055–61.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4089-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Ceci F, Cho S, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT: Joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1014–24.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3670-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sahlmann C-O, Meller B, Bouter C, Ritter CO, Ströbel P, Lotz J, et al. Biphasic 68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC-PET/CT in patients with recurrent and high-risk prostate carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:898–905.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3251-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bialek EJ, Malkowski B. Celiac ganglia: can they be misinterpreted on multimodal 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MR? Nucl Med Commun. 2019;40:175–84.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000944.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schillaci O, Urbano N. Digital PET/CT: a new intriguing chance for clinical nuclear medicine and personalized molecular imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04300-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Giesel FL, Knorr K, Spohn F, Will L, Maurer T, Flechsig P, et al. Detection efficacy of (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in 251 patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:362–8.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.212233.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, Flavell RR, Mishoe A, Feng FY, et al. Assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy in localizing recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Woythal N, Arsenic R, Kempkensteffen C, Miller K, Janssen JC, Huang K, et al. Immunohistochemical validation of PSMA expression measured by (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2018;59:238–43.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.195172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sachpekidis C, Kopka K, Eder M, Hadaschik BA, Freitag MT, Pan L, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 dynamic PET/CT imaging in primary prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41:e473–e9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001349.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rajasekaran SA, Anilkumar G, Oshima E, Bowie JU, Liu H, Heston W, et al. A novel cytoplasmic tail MXXXL motif mediates the internalization of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Mol Biol Cell. 2003;14:4835–45.  https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.e02-11-0731.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Budäus L, Leyh-Bannurah S-R, Salomon G, Michl U, Heinzer H, Huland H, et al. Initial experience of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69:393–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wieser G, Popp I, Christian Rischke H, Drendel V, Grosu AL, Bartholoma M, et al. Diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer with PET/CT imaging using the gastrin-releasing peptide receptor antagonist (68)Ga-RM2: preliminary results in patients with negative or inconclusive [(18)F]Fluoroethylcholine-PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1463–72.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3702-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    EANM’15, 28th Annual EANM Congress of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine 2015, 10-14 October 2015, Hamburg, Germany. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2015;42 Suppl 1:S1-924.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3198-z.
  37. 37.
    Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive (68)Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70:926–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    van Sluis JJ, de Jong J, Schaar J, Noordzij W, van Snick P, Dierckx R, et al. Performance characteristics of the digital Biograph Vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.215418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University HospitalUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University HospitalUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Nuclear MedicineUniversity Hospital MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations