Claudia Kesch1, Maria Vinsensia2, Jan P Radtke1,3, Heinz P Schlemmer3, Martina Heller4, Elena Ellert5, Tim Holland-Letz6, Stefan Duensing1,4, Nils Grabe7,8, Ali Afshar-Oromieh2, Kathrin Wieczorek5, Martin Schäfer9, Oliver C Neels9, Jens Cardinale9, Clemens Kratochwil2, Markus Hohenfellner1, Klaus Kopka9,10, Uwe Haberkorn2,11, Boris A Hadaschik1,12, Frederik L Giesel13,10. 1. Department of Urology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Division of Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Section of Molecular Urooncology, Department of Urology, University of Heidelberg School of Medicine, Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 6. Division of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 8. Hamamatsu Tissue Imaging and Analysis Center, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Division of Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany. 10. German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Heidelberg, Germany. 11. Clinical Cooperation Unit Nuclear Medicine, German Cancer Research Center (dkfz), Heidelberg, Germany; and. 12. Department of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 13. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany frederik@egiesel.com.
Abstract
68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 PET/CT represents an advanced method for the staging of primary prostate cancer (PCa) and diagnosis of recurrent or metastatic PCa. However, because of the narrow availability of 68Ga the development of alternative tracers is of high interest. The objective of this study was to examine the value of the new PET tracer 18F-PSMA-1007 for the staging of local disease by comparing it with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and radical prostatectomy (RP) histopathology. Methods: In 2016, 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT was performed in 10 men with biopsy-confirmed high-risk PCa. Nine patients underwent mpMRI in the process of primary diagnosis. Consecutively, RP was performed in all 10 men. Agreement analysis was performed retrospectively. PSMA staining was added for representative sections in RP specimen slices. Localization and agreement analysis of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, mpMRI, and RP specimens was performed by dividing the prostate into 38 sections as described in the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) (version 2). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values (NPVs), and accuracy were calculated for total and near-total agreement. Results: 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT had an NPV of 68% and an accuracy of 75%, and mpMRI had an NPV of 88% and an accuracy of 73% for total agreement. Near-total agreement analysis resulted in an NPV of 91% and an accuracy of 93% for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT and 91% and 87% for mpMRI, respectively. Retrospective combination of mpMRI and PET/CT had an accuracy of 81% for total and 93% for near-total agreement. Conclusion: Comparison with RP histopathology demonstrates that 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT is promising for accurate local staging of PCa.
68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 PET/CT represents an advanced method for the staging of primary prostate cancer (PCa) and diagnosis of recurrent or metastatic PCa. However, because of the narrow availability of 68Ga the development of alternative tracers is of high interest. The objective of this study was to examine the value of the new PET tracer 18F-PSMA-1007 for the staging of local disease by comparing it with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and radical prostatectomy (RP) histopathology. Methods: In 2016, 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT was performed in 10 men with biopsy-confirmed high-risk PCa. Nine patients underwent mpMRI in the process of primary diagnosis. Consecutively, RP was performed in all 10 men. Agreement analysis was performed retrospectively. PSMA staining was added for representative sections in RP specimen slices. Localization and agreement analysis of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, mpMRI, and RP specimens was performed by dividing the prostate into 38 sections as described in the prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) (version 2). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, negative predictive values (NPVs), and accuracy were calculated for total and near-total agreement. Results: 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT had an NPV of 68% and an accuracy of 75%, and mpMRI had an NPV of 88% and an accuracy of 73% for total agreement. Near-total agreement analysis resulted in an NPV of 91% and an accuracy of 93% for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT and 91% and 87% for mpMRI, respectively. Retrospective combination of mpMRI and PET/CT had an accuracy of 81% for total and 93% for near-total agreement. Conclusion: Comparison with RP histopathology demonstrates that 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT is promising for accurate local staging of PCa.
Authors: Simona Malaspina; Ugo De Giorgi; Jukka Kemppainen; Angelo Del Sole; Giovanni Paganelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Divya Yadav; Hyunsoo Hwang; Wei Qiao; Rituraj Upadhyay; Brian F Chapin; Chad Tang; Ana Aparicio; Maria A Lopez-Olivo; Stella K Kang; Homer A Macapinlac; Tharakeswara K Bathala; Devaki Shilpa Surasi Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2022-03
Authors: Christopher Darr; Nina N Harke; Jan Philipp Radtke; Leubet Yirga; Claudia Kesch; Maarten R Grootendorst; Wolfgang P Fendler; Pedro Fragoso Costa; Christoph Rischpler; Christine Praus; Johannes Haubold; Henning Reis; Thomas Hager; Ken Herrmann; Ina Binse; Boris Hadaschik Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Sara Sheikhbahaei; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Matthias Eiber; Lilja B Solnes; Mehrbod S Javadi; Ashley E Ross; Kenneth J Pienta; Mohamad E Allaf; Uwe Haberkorn; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Steven P Rowe Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Peter Donato; Matthew J Roberts; Andrew Morton; Samuel Kyle; Geoff Coughlin; Rachel Esler; Nigel Dunglison; Robert A Gardiner; John Yaxley Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-09-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Francesco Ceci; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Louise Emmett; Judit A Adam; Jamshed Bomanji; Johannes Czernin; Matthias Eiber; Uwe Haberkorn; Michael S Hofman; Thomas A Hope; Rakesh Kumar; Steven P Rowe; Sarah M Schwarzenboeck; Stefano Fanti; Ken Herrmann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 9.236