The present study analyzed the impact of Gallium-68 (68Ga)-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen-HBED-CC (68Ga-PSMA-11) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) on radiotherapeutic management in a large cohort of men with primary or recurrent disease. Methods: This study investigated 121 men with carcinoma of the prostate who underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT as well as conventional imaging. 50 patients were treatment naive, 11 had persistent prostate-specific antigen (PSA) soon after surgery and 60 presented with recurrent PSA following definitive therapy. Changes in TNM classification of malignant tumors (TNM) stage and radiotherapeutic management after 68Ga-PSMA-11 imaging were compared to results achieved with conventional imaging. Results: In total, a change in TNM stage and radiotherapeutic management was observed for 49 patients (40.5%) and 62 patients (51.2%), respectively. In treatment naïve patients, a change in TNM stage and radiotheraeutic plan occurred in 26.0% and 44.0% of the cohort respectively. For patients with PSA persistence or recurrence, TNM and radiotherapeutic management changed in 50.7% and 56.3% respectively. Conclusion: 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT may shortly become an indispensable tool for detecting prostate cancer lesions in treatment-naïve patients as well as in men with recurrent disease or persistent PSA and seems to be very helpful in personalizing radiotherapeutic management to the individual patients' distribution of disease.
The present study analyzed the impact of Gallium-68 (68Ga)-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen-HBED-CC (68Ga-PSMA-11) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) on radiotherapeutic management in a large cohort of men with primary or recurrent disease. Methods: This study investigated 121 men with carcinoma of the prostate who underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT as well as conventional imaging. 50 patients were treatment naive, 11 had persistent prostate-specific antigen (PSA) soon after surgery and 60 presented with recurrent PSA following definitive therapy. Changes in TNM classification of malignant tumors (TNM) stage and radiotherapeutic management after 68Ga-PSMA-11 imaging were compared to results achieved with conventional imaging. Results: In total, a change in TNM stage and radiotherapeutic management was observed for 49 patients (40.5%) and 62 patients (51.2%), respectively. In treatment naïve patients, a change in TNM stage and radiotheraeutic plan occurred in 26.0% and 44.0% of the cohort respectively. For patients with PSA persistence or recurrence, TNM and radiotherapeutic management changed in 50.7% and 56.3% respectively. Conclusion: 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT may shortly become an indispensable tool for detecting prostate cancer lesions in treatment-naïve patients as well as in men with recurrent disease or persistent PSA and seems to be very helpful in personalizing radiotherapeutic management to the individual patients' distribution of disease.
Authors: Jeremie Calais; Johannes Czernin; Minsong Cao; Amar U Kishan; John V Hegde; Narek Shaverdian; Kiri Sandler; Fang-I Chu; Chris R King; Michael L Steinberg; Isabel Rauscher; Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann; Thorsten Poeppel; Philipp Hetkamp; Francesco Ceci; Ken Herrmann; Wolfgang P Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Nicholas G Nickols Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Sandeep K Gupta; Tahne Watson; Jim Denham; Thomas P Shakespeare; Natalie Rutherford; Nicholas McLeod; Kevin Picton; Paul Ainsworth; Tony Bonaventura; Jarad M Martin Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Frederik A Verburg; David Pfister; Axel Heidenreich; Andreas Vogg; Natascha I Drude; Stefan Vöö; Felix M Mottaghy; Florian F Behrendt Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Eleni Avtzi; Frederik L Giesel; Tim Holland-Letz; Heinz G Linhart; Matthias Eder; Michael Eisenhut; Silvan Boxler; Boris A Hadaschik; Clemens Kratochwil; Wilko Weichert; Klaus Kopka; Jürgen Debus; Uwe Haberkorn Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: B Grubmüller; P Baltzer; D D'Andrea; S Korn; A R Haug; M Hacker; K H Grubmüller; G M Goldner; W Wadsak; S Pfaff; J Babich; C Seitz; H Fajkovic; M Susani; P Mazal; G Kramer; S F Shariat; Markus Hartenbach Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-10-26 Impact factor: 9.236
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
Authors: Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann; Chukwuka Eze; Minglun Li; Paul Rogowski; Christian Schaefer; Christian Stief; Alexander Buchner; Constantinos Zamboglou; Wolfgang Peter Fendler; Ute Ganswindt; Clemens Cyran; Peter Bartenstein; Claus Belka; Harun Ilhan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-12-14 Impact factor: 10.057
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
Authors: Daniela A Ferraro; Helena I Garcia Schüler; Urs J Muehlematter; Daniel Eberli; Julian Müller; Alexander Müller; Roger Gablinger; Helmut Kranzbühler; Aurelius Omlin; Philipp A Kaufmann; Thomas Hermanns; Irene A Burger Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Shaojun Zhu; Nader Hirmas; Jeremie Calais; Matthias Eiber; Boris Hadaschik; Martin Stuschke; Ken Herrmann; Johannes Czernin; Amar U Kishan; Nicholas G Nickols; David Elashoff; Wolfgang P Fendler Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-05-07 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Dennie Meijer; Pim J van Leeuwen; Pepijn M J Oosterholt; Yves J L Bodar; Henk G van der Poel; N Harry Hendrikse; Maarten L Donswijk; Maurits Wondergem; Annelies E Vellekoop; R Jeroen A van Moorselaar; Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; André N Vis Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 9.236