Literature DB >> 29371407

68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC Uptake in Cervical, Celiac, and Sacral Ganglia as an Important Pitfall in Prostate Cancer PET Imaging.

Christoph Rischpler1,2, Teresa I Beck3, Shozo Okamoto4,5, Anna M Schlitter6, Karina Knorr4, Markus Schwaiger4, Jürgen Gschwend7, Tobias Maurer7,8, Philipp T Meyer3, Matthias Eiber4.   

Abstract

The study aims to investigate the presence of physiologic prostate-specific membrane antigen (68Ga-PSMA)-ligand uptake on PET in cervical, celiac, and sacral ganglia of the sympathetic trunk as a pitfall for lymph node metastases in prostate cancer imaging.
Methods: Four hundred seven patients who underwent Glu-NH-CO-NH-Lys radiolabeled with 68Ga-gallium N,N-bis[2-hydroxy-5-(carboxyethyl)benzyl]ethylenediamine-N,N-diacetic acid (68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC) PET (combined with a diagnostic CT) were retrospectively analyzed. The number of 68Ga-PSMA PET-positive cervical, celiac, and sacral ganglia was determined, and the configuration and SUVmax of each ganglion were measured. In addition, the configuration and SUVmax of adjacent lymph node metastases in the respective region (cervical, celiac, or sacral) were determined.
Results: 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake above background was detected in 401 (98.5%) patients in any peripheral ganglia, in 369 (92%) patients in cervical ganglia, in 363 (89%) patients in celiac ganglia, and in 183 (46%) patients in sacral ganglia. The 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake was highest in celiac (mean SUVmax, 2.9 ± 0.8 vs. cervical mean SUVmax, 2.4 ± 0.6) and sacral (mean SUVmax 1.7 ± 0.5; both P < 0.0001) ganglia. Intraindividually there was a statistically significant but weak to moderate correlation between the 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake in cervical versus celiac ganglia (R = 0.34, P < 0.0001), cervical versus sacral (R = 0.52, P < 0.0001), and celiac versus sacral (R = 0.16, P < 0.05). The 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake was significantly more intense in adjacent lymph node metastases than the respective ganglia (cervical: 18.0 ± 16.2 vs. 2.4 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001; celiac: 13.5 ± 12.3 vs. 2.9 ± 0.8, P < 0.0001; sacral: 13.4 ± 11.6 vs. 1.7 ± 0.5, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, ganglia predominantly exhibit a band-shaped configuration (71.2%), followed by a teardrop (26.8%) and only rarely a nodular configuration (2.0%). Conversely, lymph node metastases are only rarely band-shaped (1.1%), but more often show teardrop (40.3%) or nodular appearance (58.6%) (P < 0.00001).
Conclusion: 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake in ganglia along the sympathetic trunk as assessed by 68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC PET represents an important pitfall in prostate cancer PET imaging. The 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake is higher in celiac ganglia than cervical or sacral ganglia, and the level of 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake seems to be patient-related. For the differentiation between lymph node metastases and sympathetic ganglia, both intensity of 68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake and exact localization and configuration of the respective lesion should be examined carefully.
© 2018 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

Entities:  

Keywords:  68Ga-PSMA; 68Ga-PSMA expression; PET; PET/CT; oncology: GU; pitfall; prostate cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29371407     DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.204677

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  41 in total

1.  [68Ga]Ga-P16-093 as a PSMA-Targeted PET Radiopharmaceutical for Detection of Cancer: Initial Evaluation and Comparison with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in Prostate Cancer Patients Presenting with Biochemical Recurrence.

Authors:  Mark A Green; Gary D Hutchins; Clinton D Bahler; Mark Tann; Carla J Mathias; Wendy Territo; Justin Sims; Heather Polson; David Alexoff; William C Eckelman; Hank F Kung; James W Fletcher
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Potential Impact of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT on the Planning of Definitive Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Jeremie Calais; Amar U Kishan; Minsong Cao; Wolfgang P Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Ken Herrmann; Francesco Ceci; Robert E Reiter; Matthew B Rettig; John V Hegde; Narek Shaverdian; Chris R King; Michael L Steinberg; Johannes Czernin; Nicholas G Nickols
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Quantitative imaging of the receptor for advanced glycation end-products in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Christian J Konopka; Marcin Woźniak; Jamila Hedhli; Anna Siekierzycka; Jarosław Skokowski; Rafał Pęksa; Marcin Matuszewski; Gnanasekar Munirathinam; Andre Kajdacsy-Balla; Iwona T Dobrucki; Leszek Kalinowski; Lawrence W Dobrucki
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Novel Structured Reporting Systems for Theranostic Radiotracers.

Authors:  Rudolf A Werner; Ralph A Bundschuh; Lena Bundschuh; Stefano Fanti; Mehrbod S Javadi; Takahiro Higuchi; Alexander Weich; Kenneth J Pienta; Andreas K Buck; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Ken Herrmann; Constantin Lapa; Steven P Rowe
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-02-22       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Suboptimal Sensitivity and Specificity of PET and Other Gross Imaging Techniques in Assessing Lymph Node Metastasis.

Authors:  Abass Alavi; Sean D Carlin; Thomas J Werner; Abdullah Al-Zaghal
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Interobserver Agreement for the Standardized Reporting System PSMA-RADS 1.0 on 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Imaging.

Authors:  Rudolf A Werner; Ralph A Bundschuh; Lena Bundschuh; Mehrbod S Javadi; Jeffrey P Leal; Takahiro Higuchi; Kenneth J Pienta; Andreas K Buck; Martin G Pomper; Michael A Gorin; Constantin Lapa; Steven P Rowe
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 7.  Looking for Drugs in All the Wrong Places: Use of GCPII Inhibitors Outside the Brain.

Authors:  James J Vornov; Diane Peters; Mike Nedelcovych; Kristen Hollinger; Rana Rais; Barbara S Slusher
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 3.996

Review 8.  Expanding the role of small-molecule PSMA ligands beyond PET staging of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Shankar Siva; Cristian Udovicich; Ben Tran; Homi Zargar; Declan G Murphy; Michael S Hofman
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 14.432

9.  [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in prostate cancer: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Frédéric Bois; Camille Noirot; Sébastien Dietemann; Ismini C Mainta; Thomas Zilli; Valentina Garibotto; Martin A Walter
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-12-15

10.  Digital versus analogue PET in [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for recurrent prostate cancer: a matched-pair comparison.

Authors:  Ian Alberts; George Prenosil; Christos Sachpekidis; Thilo Weitzel; Kuangyu Shi; Axel Rominger; Ali Afshar-Oromieh
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.