PURPOSE: We assessed the rate of detection rate of recurrent prostate cancer by PET/CT using anti-3-(18)F-FACBC, a new synthetic amino acid, in comparison to that using (11)C-choline as part of an ongoing prospective single-centre study. METHODS: Included in the study were 15 patients with biochemical relapse after initial radical treatment of prostate cancer. All the patients underwent anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT and (11)C-choline PET/CT within a 7-day period. The detection rates using the two compounds were determined and the target-to-background ratios (TBR) of each lesion are reported. RESULTS: No adverse reactions to anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT were noted. On a patient basis, (11)C-choline PET/CT was positive in 3 patients and negative in 12 (detection rate 20%), and anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT was positive in 6 patients and negative in 9 (detection rate 40%). On a lesion basis, (11)C-choline detected 6 lesions (4 bone, 1 lymph node, 1 local relapse), and anti-3-(18)F-FACBC detected 11 lesions (5 bone, 5 lymph node, 1 local relapse). All (11)C-choline-positive lesions were also identified by anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT. The TBR of anti-3-(18)F-FACBC was greater than that of (11)C-choline in 8/11 lesions, as were image quality and contrast. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results indicate that anti-3-(18)F-FACBC may be superior to (11)C-choline for the identification of disease recurrence in the setting of biochemical failure. Further studies are required to assess efficacy of anti-3-(18)F-FACBC in a larger series of prostate cancer patients.
PURPOSE: We assessed the rate of detection rate of recurrent prostate cancer by PET/CT using anti-3-(18)F-FACBC, a new synthetic amino acid, in comparison to that using (11)C-choline as part of an ongoing prospective single-centre study. METHODS: Included in the study were 15 patients with biochemical relapse after initial radical treatment of prostate cancer. All the patients underwent anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT and (11)C-choline PET/CT within a 7-day period. The detection rates using the two compounds were determined and the target-to-background ratios (TBR) of each lesion are reported. RESULTS: No adverse reactions to anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT were noted. On a patient basis, (11)C-choline PET/CT was positive in 3 patients and negative in 12 (detection rate 20%), and anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT was positive in 6 patients and negative in 9 (detection rate 40%). On a lesion basis, (11)C-choline detected 6 lesions (4 bone, 1 lymph node, 1 local relapse), and anti-3-(18)F-FACBC detected 11 lesions (5 bone, 5 lymph node, 1 local relapse). All (11)C-choline-positive lesions were also identified by anti-3-(18)F-FACBC PET/CT. The TBR of anti-3-(18)F-FACBC was greater than that of (11)C-choline in 8/11 lesions, as were image quality and contrast. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary results indicate that anti-3-(18)F-FACBC may be superior to (11)C-choline for the identification of disease recurrence in the setting of biochemical failure. Further studies are required to assess efficacy of anti-3-(18)F-FACBC in a larger series of prostate cancerpatients.
Authors: David M Schuster; Bital Savir-Baruch; Peter T Nieh; Viraj A Master; Raghuveer K Halkar; Peter J Rossi; Melinda M Lewis; Jonathon A Nye; Weiping Yu; F DuBois Bowman; Mark M Goodman Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: David M Schuster; John R Votaw; Peter T Nieh; Weiping Yu; Jonathon A Nye; Viraj Master; F DuBois Bowman; Muta M Issa; Mark M Goodman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: T M Shoup; J Olson; J M Hoffman; J Votaw; D Eshima; L Eshima; V M Camp; M Stabin; D Votaw; M M Goodman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Arun Sreekumar; Laila M Poisson; Thekkelnaycke M Rajendiran; Amjad P Khan; Qi Cao; Jindan Yu; Bharathi Laxman; Rohit Mehra; Robert J Lonigro; Yong Li; Mukesh K Nyati; Aarif Ahsan; Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram; Bo Han; Xuhong Cao; Jaeman Byun; Gilbert S Omenn; Debashis Ghosh; Subramaniam Pennathur; Danny C Alexander; Alvin Berger; Jeffrey R Shuster; John T Wei; Sooryanarayana Varambally; Christopher Beecher; Arul M Chinnaiyan Journal: Nature Date: 2009-02-12 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Jonathon A Nye; David M Schuster; Weiping Yu; Vernon M Camp; Mark M Goodman; John R Votaw Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Hebert Alberto Vargas; Alexandre G Martin-Malburet; Toshikazu Takeda; Renato B Corradi; James Eastham; Andreas Wibmer; Evis Sala; Michael J Zelefsky; Wolfgang A Weber; Hedvig Hricak Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 3.498