Detection rate of PET/CT in patients with biochemical relapse of prostate cancer using [68Ga]PSMA I&T and comparison with published data of [68Ga]PSMA HBED-CC

  • Christoph Berliner
  • Milena Tienken
  • Thorsten Frenzel
  • Yuske Kobayashi
  • Annabelle Helberg
  • Uve Kirchner
  • Susanne Klutmann
  • Dirk Beyersdorff
  • Lars Budäus
  • Hans-Jürgen Wester
  • Janos Mester
  • Peter Bannas
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the detection rate of PET/CT in biochemical relapse of prostate cancer using [68Ga]PSMA I&T and to compare it with published detection rates of [68Ga]PSMA HBED-CC.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis in 83 consecutive patients with documented biochemical relapse after prostatectomy. All patients underwent whole body [68Ga]PSMA I&T PET/CT. PET/CT images were evaluated for presence of local recurrence, lymph node metastases, and distant metastases. Proportions of positive PET/CT results were calculated for six subgroups with increasing prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels (<0.5 ng/mL, 0.5 to <1.0 ng/mL, 1.0 to <2.0 ng/mL, 2.0 to <5.0 ng/mL, 5.0 to <10.0, ≥10.0 ng/mL). Detection rates of [68Ga]PSMA I&T were statistically compared with published detection rates of [68Ga]PSMA HBED-CC using exact Fisher’s test.

Results

Median PSA was 0.81 (range: 0.01 – 128) ng/mL. In 58/83 patients (70 %) at least one [68Ga]PSMA I&T positive lesion was detected. Local recurrent cancer was present in 18 patients (22 %), lymph node metastases in 29 patients (35 %), and distant metastases in 15 patients (18 %). The tumor detection rate was positively correlated with PSA levels, resulting in detection rates of 52 % (<0.5 ng/mL), 55 % (0.5 to <1.0 ng/mL), 70 % (1.0 to <2.0 ng/mL), 93 % (2.0 to <5.0 ng/mL), 100 % (5.0 to <10.0 ng/mL), and 100 % (≥10.0 ng/mL). There was no significant difference between the detection rate of [68Ga]PSMA I&T and published detection rates of [68Ga]PSMA HBED-CC (all p>0.05).

Conclusions

[68Ga]PSMA I&T PET/CT has high detection rates of recurrent prostate cancer that are comparable to [68Ga]PSMA HBED-CC.

Keywords

Prostate cancer PET/CT Positron emission tomography PSMA 68Ga 

References

  1. 1.
    Stewart BW, Wild CP. World cancer report 2014. International Agency for Research on Cancer: Lyon, France; 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferlay J SI, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray, F. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr, Accessed on 6 June 2016.
  3. 3.
    Grimm P, Billiet I, Bostwick D, Dicker AP, Frank S, Immerzeel J, et al. Comparative analysis of prostate-specific antigen free survival outcomes for patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treatment by radical therapy. Results from the Prostate Cancer Results Study Group. BJU Int. 2012;109 Suppl 1:22–9. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10827.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI, Walsh PC. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003;169:517–23. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000045749.90353.c7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tyson MD, Penson DF, Resnick MJ. The comparative oncologic effectiveness of available management strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.03.021.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aus G, Chapple C, Hanûs T, Irani J, Lobel B, Loch T, et al. The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines methodology: a critical evaluation. Eur Urol. 2009;56:859–64. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ravery V. The significance of recurrent PSA after radical prostatectomy: benign versus malignant sources. Semin Urol Oncol. 1999;17:127–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bott SRJ. Management of recurrent disease after radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2004;7:211–6. doi:10.1038/sj.pcan.4500732.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock I, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA, et al. Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1148–59. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.12.4487.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davila D, Antoniou A, Chaudhry MA. Evaluation of osseous metastasis in bone scintigraphy. Semin Nucl Med. 2015;45:3–15. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2014.07.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krause BJ, Souvatzoglou M, Tuncel M, Herrmann K, Buck AK, Praus C, et al. The detection rate of C-11 Choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:18–23. doi:10.1007/s00259-007-0581-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Castellucci P, Picchio M. C-11-Choline PET/CT and PSA kinetics. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:S36–40. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2377-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Graute V, Jansen N, Ubleis C, Seitz M, Hartenbach M, Scherr MK, et al. Relationship between PSA kinetics and F-18 fluorocholine PET/CT detection rates of recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after total prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:271–82. doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1970-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Rubello D, Schiavina R, Santi I, Nanni C, et al. Is there a role for C-11-choline PET/CT in the early detection of metastatic disease in surgically treated prostate cancer patients with a mild PSA increase < 1.5 ng/ml? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:55–63. doi:10.1007/s00259-010-1604-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beer AJ, Eiber M, Souvatzoglou M, Schwaiger M, Krause BJ. Radionuclide and hybrid imaging of recurrent prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:181–91. doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70103-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eder M, Schäfer M, Bauder-Wüst U, Hull W-E, Wängler C, Mier W, et al. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012;23:688–97. doi:10.1021/bc200279b.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel F, Holland-Letz T, Linhart H, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:197–209. doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:668–74. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.154153.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a Ga-68-labelled PSMA ligand and F-18-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:11–20. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2525-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weineisen M, Simecek J, Schottelius M, Schwaiger M, Wester HJ. Synthesis and preclinical evaluation of DOTAGA-conjugated PSMA ligands for functional imaging and endoradiotherapy of prostate cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2014;4:63. doi:10.1186/s13550-014-0063-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weineisen M, Schottelius M, Simecek J, Baum RP, Yildiz A, Beykan S, et al. 68Ga- and 177Lu-labeled PSMA I&T: optimization of a PSMA-targeted theranostic concept and first proof-of-concept human studies. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1169–76. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.158550.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Baum RP, Kulkarni HR, Schuchardt C, Singh A, Wirtz M, Wiessalla S, et al. 177Lu-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: safety and efficacy. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:1006–13. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.168443.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martin R, Jüttler S, Müller M, Wester HJ. Cationic eluate pretreatment for automated synthesis of [68Ga]CPCR4.2. Nucl Med Biol. 2014;41:84–9. doi:10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2013.09.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rauscher I, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Vag T, Wirtz M, et al. Intrapatient comparison of 111In-PSMA I&T SPECT/CT and hybrid 68Ga-HBED-CC PSMA PET in patients with early recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2016. doi:10.1097/RLU.0000000000001273.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lütje S, Blex S, Gomez B, Schaarschmidt BM, Umutlu L, Forsting M, et al. Optimization of acquisition time of 68Ga-PSMA-ligand PET/MRI in patients with local and metastatic prostate cancer. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0164392. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0164392.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sahlmann CO, Meller B, Bouter C, Ritter CO, Strobel P, Lotz J, et al. Biphasic Ga-68-PSMA-HBED-CC-PET/CT in patients with recurrent and high-risk prostate carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:898–905. doi:10.1007/s00259-015-3251-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, Tang R, Ho B, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1185–90. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.160382.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Husarik DB, Miralbell R, Dubs M, John H, Giger OT, Gelet A, et al. Evaluation of [F-18]-choline PET/CT for staging and restaging of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:253–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brogsitter C, Zöphel K, Kotzerke J. 18F-Choline, 11C-choline and 11C-acetate PET/CT: comparative analysis for imaging prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40 Suppl 1:S18–27. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2358-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen Y, Pullambhatla M, Foss CA, Byun Y, Nimmagadda S, Senthamizhchelvan S, et al. 2-(3-{1-Carboxy-5- (6- F-18 Fluoro-Pyridine-3-Carbonyl)-Amino -Pentyl}-U reido)-Pentanedioic Acid, F-18 DCFPyL, a PSMA-Based PET imaging agent for prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:7645–53. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-11-1357.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rowe SP, Macura KJ, Mena E, Blackford AL, Nadal R, Antonarakis ES, et al. PSMA-Based [F]DCFPyL PET/CT is superior to conventional imaging for lesion detection in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2016. doi:10.1007/s11307-016-0957-6.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Szabo Z, Mena E, Rowe SP, Plyku D, Nidal R, Eisenberger MA, et al. Initial evaluation of [(18)F]DCFPyL for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-Targeted PET imaging of prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17:565–74. doi:10.1007/s11307-015-0850-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dietlein M, Kobe C, Kuhnert G, Stockter S, Fischer T, Schomacker K, et al. Comparison of F-18 DCFPyL and Ga-68 Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET imaging in patients with relapsed prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17:575–84. doi:10.1007/s11307-015-0866-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Demir M, Abuqbeitah M, Uslu-Beşli L, Yıldırım Ö, Yeyin N, Çavdar İ, et al. Evaluation of radiation safety in (177)Lu-PSMA therapy and development of outpatient treatment protocol. J Radiol Prot. 2016;36:269–78. doi:10.1088/0952-4746/36/2/269.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kratochwil C, Giesel FL, Eder M, Afshar-Oromieh A, Benesova M, Mier W, et al. Lu-177 Lutetium-labelled PSMA ligand-induced remission in a patient with metastatic prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:987–8. doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2978-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pillai AM, Knapp FF. Lutetium-177 labeled therapeutics: 177Lu-PSMA is set to redefine prostate cancer treatment. Curr Radiopharm. 2016;9:6–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kübler 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. doi:10.1007/s00259-016-3419-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Derlin T, Weiberg D, von Klot C, Wester HJ, Henkenberens C, Ross TL, et al. Ga-PSMA I&T PET/CT for assessment of prostate cancer: evaluation of image quality after forced diuresis and delayed imaging. Eur Radiol. 2016. doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4308-4.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kabasakal L, Demirci E, Ocak M, Akyel R, Nematyazar J, Aygun A, et al. Evaluation of PSMA PET/CT imaging using a 68Ga-HBED-CC ligand in patients with prostate cancer and the value of early pelvic imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2015;36:582–7. doi:10.1097/mnm.0000000000000290.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chakraborty PS, Tripathi M, Agarwal KK, Kumar R, Vijay MK, Bal C. Metastatic Poorly Differentiated Prostatic Carcinoma With Neuroendocrine Differentiation Negative on Ga-68-PSMA PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:E163–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hijazi S, Meller B, Leitsmann C, Strauss A, Meller J, Ritter CO, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for nodal oligometastatic prostate cancer detected by 68Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate. 2015;75:1934–40. doi:10.1002/pros.23091.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rauscher I, Maurer T, Fendler WP, Sommer WH, Schwaiger M, Eiber M. (68)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer: How we review and report. Cancer Imaging. 2016;16:14. doi:10.1186/s40644-016-0072-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Berliner
    • 1
  • Milena Tienken
    • 1
  • Thorsten Frenzel
    • 2
  • Yuske Kobayashi
    • 1
  • Annabelle Helberg
    • 1
  • Uve Kirchner
    • 1
  • Susanne Klutmann
    • 1
  • Dirk Beyersdorff
    • 1
    • 3
  • Lars Budäus
    • 3
  • Hans-Jürgen Wester
    • 4
  • Janos Mester
    • 1
  • Peter Bannas
    • 1
  1. 1.Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear MedicineUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Ambulatory Center, Department for Radiation OncologyUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Martini-KlinikUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Pharmaceutical RadiochemistryTechnical University MunichGarchingGermany

Personalised recommendations