PURPOSE: The first aim of the study was to investigate the diagnostic potential of (11)C-acetate PET in the early detection of prostate cancer recurrence. A second aim was the evaluation of early and late PET in this context. METHODS: The study population comprised 32 prostate cancer patients with early evidence of relapse after initial radiotherapy (group A) or radical surgery (group B). The median PSA of group A (n=17) patients was 6 ng/ml (range 2.6-30.2) while that of group B (n=15) was 0.4 ng/ml (range 0.08-4.8). Pelvic-abdominal-thoracic PET was started 2 min after injection of (11)C-acetate and evaluated after fusion with CT. RESULTS: Group A: Taking a SUV(max)> or =2 as the cut-off, PET showed local recurrences in 14/17 patients and two equivocal results. Distant disease was observed in six patients and an equivocal result was obtained in one. Endorectal MRI was positive in 12/12 patients. Biopsy confirmed local recurrence in six of six (100%) patients. PET was positive in five of the six patients with biopsy-proven recurrences, the result in the remaining patient being equivocal. Group B: Among the 15 patients, visual interpretation was positive for local recurrences in five patients and equivocal in four. One obturator lymph node was positive. Endorectal MRI was positive in 11/15 patients and equivocal in two. Positional correlation of positive/equivocal results on PET and endorectal MRI was observed in seven of nine patients. PSA decreased significantly after salvage radiotherapy in 8/14 patients, providing strong evidence for local recurrence. PET of the eight patients responding to RT was positive in three and equivocal in two. CONCLUSION: (11)C-acetate PET was found to be valuable in the early evaluation of prostate cancer relapse. Optimising scanning time and use of modern PET-CT equipment might allow further improvement.
PURPOSE: The first aim of the study was to investigate the diagnostic potential of (11)C-acetate PET in the early detection of prostate cancer recurrence. A second aim was the evaluation of early and late PET in this context. METHODS: The study population comprised 32 prostate cancerpatients with early evidence of relapse after initial radiotherapy (group A) or radical surgery (group B). The median PSA of group A (n=17) patients was 6 ng/ml (range 2.6-30.2) while that of group B (n=15) was 0.4 ng/ml (range 0.08-4.8). Pelvic-abdominal-thoracic PET was started 2 min after injection of (11)C-acetate and evaluated after fusion with CT. RESULTS: Group A: Taking a SUV(max)> or =2 as the cut-off, PET showed local recurrences in 14/17 patients and two equivocal results. Distant disease was observed in six patients and an equivocal result was obtained in one. Endorectal MRI was positive in 12/12 patients. Biopsy confirmed local recurrence in six of six (100%) patients. PET was positive in five of the six patients with biopsy-proven recurrences, the result in the remaining patient being equivocal. Group B: Among the 15 patients, visual interpretation was positive for local recurrences in five patients and equivocal in four. One obturator lymph node was positive. Endorectal MRI was positive in 11/15 patients and equivocal in two. Positional correlation of positive/equivocal results on PET and endorectal MRI was observed in seven of nine patients. PSA decreased significantly after salvage radiotherapy in 8/14 patients, providing strong evidence for local recurrence. PET of the eight patients responding to RT was positive in three and equivocal in two. CONCLUSION:(11)C-acetate PET was found to be valuable in the early evaluation of prostate cancer relapse. Optimising scanning time and use of modern PET-CT equipment might allow further improvement.
Authors: Nobuyuki Oyama; Tom R Miller; Farrokh Dehdashti; Barry A Siegel; Keith C Fischer; Jeff M Michalski; Adam S Kibel; Gerald L Andriole; Joel Picus; Michael J Welch Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Daniel T Schmid; Hubert John; Roland Zweifel; Tibor Cservenyak; Gerrit Westera; Gerhard W Goerres; Gustav K von Schulthess; Thomas F Hany Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Martin Heinisch; Albert Dirisamer; Wolfgang Loidl; Franz Stoiber; Bernhard Gruy; Silke Haim; Werner Langsteger Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2006 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Patrick M Winter; Shelton D Caruthers; Andrea Kassner; Thomas D Harris; Lori K Chinen; John S Allen; Elizabeth K Lacy; Huiying Zhang; J David Robertson; Samuel A Wickline; Gregory M Lanza Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: MÁrio Ginja; Paula A Oliveira; Ana I Faustino-Rocha; Fernanda Seixas; Rita Ferreira; Jessica Silva; Maria J Pires; Margarida Fardilha Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.155