Correlations between whole body volumetric parameters of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and biochemical-histopathological parameters in castration-naive and resistant prostate cancer patients

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the relationship between whole body volumetric (Wbv) results of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT with biochemical and histopathological parameters.

Methods

One hundred twenty-one prostate cancer patients who underwent 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT between January 2018 and December 2019 were included. Imaging was conducted for staging upon new diagnosis with moderate- and high-risk disease and for confirming the progression of castration resistance. The relationships between the Wbv 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT parameters and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, PSA doubling time and Gleason score (GS) were evaluated.

Results

The median GS and mean PSA levels were similar between the castration-naive and resistant patients. The PSA levels were positively correlated with MTVwb (p: 0.009, r: 0.286) and TLPwb (p: 0.002, r: 0.344). Gleason scores were positively correlated with MTVwb (p: 0.050, r: 0.216), TLPwb (p: 0.007, r: 0.296) and highest standard uptake value (HSUV) max (p: 0.047, r: 0.220). In the castration-naive group, Gleason scores (from p < 0.001 to p = 0.04 and r = 0.331 to 0.549) and PSA levels (from p = 0.002 to p = 0.045 and from r = 0.323 to 0.473) correlated with all 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT parameters. PSA doubling time was negatively correlated with whole-body metabolic tumour volume (MTVwb) (p: 0.050, r: 0.232) and whole-body total lesion PSMA (TLPwb) (p: 0.026, r: 0.262). The MTVwb, TLPwb and HSUVpeak values of the patients with biochemical recurrence (BR) of 0–6 months (n = 18) were higher than those with BR > 2 years (n = 35) (p = 0.046, 0.047 and 0.042, respectively).

Conclusions

Wbv 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT results were correlated with PSA levels and Gleason scores. The correlation was relatively stronger in the castration-naive group. The prognostic accuracy of PSA in the resistant group may be weaker than in the naive group. The difference in volumetric parameters of patients with short BR compared to long BR supports the idea that 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT can distinguish patients with rapid relapse from others.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1.

    Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Mathers C, Parkin DM, Piñeros M, et al. Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int J Cancer. 2019;144:1941–53.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Henderickx MMEL, Brits T, Muilwijk T, Adams T, Vandeursen H. Localized prostate cancer and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective, comparative study between pre- and post-operative Gleason scores. Acta Chir Belg. 2018;118:15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Hussain M, Fizazi K, Saad F, Rathenborg P, Shore N, Ferreira U, et al. Enzalutamide in men with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:2465–74.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Naccarato AMEP, Consuelo Souto S, Matheus WE, Ferreira U, Denardi F (2018). Quality of life and sexual health in men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Aging Male 24:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/13685538.2018.1486397. Epub ahead of print.

  5. 5.

    Choueiri TK, Dreicer R, Paciorek A, Carroll PR, Konety B. A model that predicts the probability of positive imaging in prostate cancer cases with biochemical failure after initial definitive local therapy. J Urol. 2008;179:906–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    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.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Petersen LJ, Nielsen JB, Langkilde NC, Petersen A, Afshar- Oromieh A, De Souza NM, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT compared with MRI/CT and diffusion-weightedMRI for primary lymph node staging prior to definitive radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study. World J Urol. 2020;38:939–48.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Öbek C, Doğanca T, Demirci E, Ocak M, Kural AR, Yıldırım A, Yücetaş U, Demirdağ Ç, Erdoğan SM, Kabasakal L, Members of Urooncology Association, Turkey. The accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary lymph node staging in high-risk prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;44:1806–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Schmuck S, von Klot CA, Henkenberens C, Sohns JM, Christiansen H, Wester HJ, et al. Initial experience with volumetric 68 Ga PSMA I and T PET/CT for assessment of whole-body tumor burden as a quantitative imaging biomarker in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1962–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Schmidkonz C, Cordes M, Schmidt D, Bäuerle T, Goetz TI, Beck M, et al. 68 GaPSMA-11 PET/CT-derived metabolic parameters for determination of whole-body tumor burden and treatment response in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:1862–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Gafita A, Bieth M, Krönke M, Tetteh G, Navarro F, Wang H, et al. qPSMA: semiautomatic software for whole-body tumor burden assessment in prostate cancer using 68Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:1277–83.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Hijazi S, Meller B, Leitsmann C, Strauss A, Ritter C, Lotz J, et al. See the unseen: mesorectal lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. Prostate. 2016;76:776–80.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    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 68 Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate. 2015;75:1934–40.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Henkenberens C, Vonk CA, Ross TL, Bengel FM, Wester HJ, Katja H, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT-based radiotherapy for lymph node relapse of prostate cancer after primary therapy delays initiation of systemic therapy. Anticancer Res. 2017;37:1273–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, ProPSMA Study Group Collaborators, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395:1208–16.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Medina-Ornelas Sevastián S, García-Pérez Francisco O, Hernández-Pedro Norma Y, Arellano-Zarate Angélica E, Abúndiz-López BL. Correlation between molecular tumor volume evaluated with 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and prostatic specific antigen levels. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2018;37:223–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, Williams M, Udovicich C, Vela I, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049 (Epub ahead of print 14 February 2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Weirich G, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of 68gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2016;195:1436–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, Delprado W, Ting F, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective evaluation of 68gallium-prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017;119:209–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Thomas L, Balmus C, Ahmadzadehfar H, Essler M, Strunk H, Bundschuh RA. Assessment of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer-a comparison between 99mTc-bone-scintigraphy and [68Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT. Pharmaceuticals. 2017;10:68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Pyka T, Okamoto S, Dahlbender M, Tauber R, Retz M, Heck M, et al. Comparison of bone scintigraphy and 68Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:2114–21.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Pereira Mestre R, Treglia G, Ferrari M, Pascale M, Mazzara C, Azinwi NC, et al. Correlation between PSA kinetics and PSMA-PET in prostate cancer restaging: a meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Invest. 2019;49:e13063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Zou Q, Jiao J, Zou MH, Li MZ, Yang T, Xu L, et al. Semi-automatic evaluation of baseline whole-body tumor burden as an imaging biomarker of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol. 2020;9:18.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Qu LG, Nzenza T, McMillan K, Sengupta S. Delays in prostate cancer care within a hospital network in Victoria. Australia ANZ J Surg. 2019;89:1599–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Yilmaz U, Komek H, Can C, Altindag S. The role of (68Ga)PSMA I&T in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: detection rate and the correlation between the level of PSA, Gleason score, and the SUVmax. Ann Nucl Med. 2019;33:545–53.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Santos A, Mattiolli A, Carvalheira JB, Ferreira U, Camacho M, Silva C, et al. PSMA whole-body tumor burden in primary staging and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020;8:13.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Brito AET, Mourato FA, de Oliveira RPM, Leal ALG, Filho PJA, de Filho JLL. Evaluation of whole-body tumor burden with 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2019;33:344–50.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Puca L, Vlachostergios PJ, Beltran H. Neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer: emerging biology, models, and therapies. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2019;9:a030593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Bakht MK, Lovnicki JM, Tubman J, Stringer KF, Chiaramonte J, Reynolds MR, et al. Differential expression of glucose transporters and hexokinases in prostate cancer with a neuroendocrine gene signature: a mechanistic perspective for 18f-FDG imaging of PSMA-suppressed tumors. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:904–10.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Thang SP, Violet J, Sandhu S, Iravani A, Akhurst T, Kong G, et al. Poor Outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with low prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression deemed ineligible for 177Lu-labelled PSMA radioligand therapy. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019;2:670–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Komek H, Can C, Yilmaz U, Altindag S. Prognostic value of 68 Ga PSMA I and T PET/CT SUV parameters on survival outcome in advanced prostat cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2018;32:542–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Sanli Y, Kuyumcu S, Sanli O, Buyukkaya F, İribaş A, Alcin G, et al. Relationships between serum PSA levels, Gleason scores and results of 68Ga-PSMAPET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2017;31:709–17.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Ceci F, Uprimny C, Nilica B, Geraldo L, Kendler D, Kroiss A, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT for restaging recurrent prostate cancer: which factors are associated with PET/CT detection rate? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1284–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Gauthé M, Belissant O, Girard A, Zhang Yin J, Ohnona J, Cottereau AS, et al. PET/CT and biochemical recurrence of prostate adenocarcinoma: added value of 68Ga-PSMA-11 when 18Ffluorocholine is non-contributive. Prog Urol. 2017;27:474–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Calais J, Ceci F, Eiber M, Hope TA, Hofman MS, Rischpler C, et al. 18F-Fluciclovine PET-CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:1286–94.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Halil Kömek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yildirim, Ö.A., Gündoğan, C., Can, C. et al. Correlations between whole body volumetric parameters of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and biochemical-histopathological parameters in castration-naive and resistant prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-021-01594-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Prostate cancer
  • 68ga-PSMA
  • PET/CT
  • Prostate-specific antigen
  • Gleason score