Isabel Rauscher1, Markus Krönke2, Michael König2, Andrei Gafita2, Tobias Maurer3,4, Thomas Horn3, Kilian Schiller5, Wolfgang Weber2, Matthias Eiber2. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany isabel.rauscher@tum.de. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany. 3. Department of Urology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. Department of Urology and Martini-Klinik, University of Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; and. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
18F-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand PET has several principal advantages over 68Ga-PSMA-11. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the frequency of non-tumor-related uptake and the detection efficacy comparing 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in recurrent prostate cancer (PC) patients. Methods: The study included 102 patients with biochemically recurrent PC after radical prostatectomy undergoing 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT imaging. On the basis of various clinical variables, patients with corresponding 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scans were matched. All PET/CT scans (n = 204) were reviewed by 1 nuclear medicine physician. First, all PET-positive lesions were noted. Then, lesions suspected of being recurrent PC were differentiated from lesions attributed to a benign origin on the basis of known pitfalls and information from CT. For each region, the SUVmax of the lesion with the highest PSMA-ligand uptake was noted. Detection rates were determined, and SUVmax was compared separately for 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 18F-PSMA-1007. Results: In total, 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET revealed 369 and 178 PSMA-ligand-positive lesions, respectively. 18F-PSMA-1007 PET revealed approximately 5 times more lesions attributed to a benign origin than did 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET (245 vs. 52 lesions, respectively). The benign lesions most frequently observed were ganglia, unspecific lymph node, and bone lesions, at a rate of 43%, 31%, and 24% for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 29%, 42%, and 27% for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET, respectively. The SUVmax of lesions attributed to a benign origin was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET. Further, a similar number of lesions was attributed to recurrent PC (124/369 for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 126/178 for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET). Conclusion: The number of lesions with increased PSMA-ligand uptake attributed to a benign origin is considerably higher for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET than for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET. This finding indicates the need for sophisticated reader training emphasizing known pitfalls and reporting within the clinical context.
18F-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand PET has several principal advantages over 68Ga-PSMA-11. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the frequency of non-tumor-related uptake and the detection efficacy comparing 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in recurrent prostate cancer (PC) patients. Methods: The study included 102 patients with biochemically recurrent PC after radical prostatectomy undergoing 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT imaging. On the basis of various clinical variables, patients with corresponding 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scans were matched. All PET/CT scans (n = 204) were reviewed by 1 nuclear medicine physician. First, all PET-positive lesions were noted. Then, lesions suspected of being recurrent PC were differentiated from lesions attributed to a benign origin on the basis of known pitfalls and information from CT. For each region, the SUVmax of the lesion with the highest PSMA-ligand uptake was noted. Detection rates were determined, and SUVmax was compared separately for 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 18F-PSMA-1007. Results: In total, 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET revealed 369 and 178 PSMA-ligand-positive lesions, respectively. 18F-PSMA-1007 PET revealed approximately 5 times more lesions attributed to a benign origin than did 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET (245 vs. 52 lesions, respectively). The benign lesions most frequently observed were ganglia, unspecific lymph node, and bone lesions, at a rate of 43%, 31%, and 24% for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 29%, 42%, and 27% for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET, respectively. The SUVmax of lesions attributed to a benign origin was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET. Further, a similar number of lesions was attributed to recurrent PC (124/369 for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET and 126/178 for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET). Conclusion: The number of lesions with increased PSMA-ligand uptake attributed to a benign origin is considerably higher for 18F-PSMA-1007 PET than for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET. This finding indicates the need for sophisticated reader training emphasizing known pitfalls and reporting within the clinical context.
Authors: Jens Cardinale; Martin Schäfer; Martina Benešová; Ulrike Bauder-Wüst; Karin Leotta; Matthias Eder; Oliver C Neels; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel; Klaus Kopka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Christoph Rischpler; Teresa I Beck; Shozo Okamoto; Anna M Schlitter; Karina Knorr; Markus Schwaiger; Jürgen Gschwend; Tobias Maurer; Philipp T Meyer; Matthias Eiber Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-01-25 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: Frederik L Giesel; B Hadaschik; J Cardinale; J Radtke; M Vinsensia; W Lehnert; C Kesch; Y Tolstov; S Singer; N Grabe; S Duensing; M Schäfer; O C Neels; W Mier; U Haberkorn; K Kopka; C Kratochwil Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-11-26 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Kambiz Rahbar; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Robert Seifert; Stefan Wagner; Michael Schäfers; Martin Bögemann; Matthias Weckesser Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Frederik L Giesel; Karina Knorr; Fabian Spohn; Leon Will; Tobias Maurer; Paul Flechsig; Oliver Neels; Kilian Schiller; Horacio Amaral; Wolfgang A Weber; Uwe Haberkorn; Markus Schwaiger; Clemens Kratochwil; Peter Choyke; Vasko Kramer; Klaus Kopka; Matthias Eiber Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Cédric Draulans; Robin De Roover; Uulke A van der Heide; Linda Kerkmeijer; Robert J Smeenk; Floris Pos; Wouter V Vogel; James Nagarajah; Marcel Janssen; Sofie Isebaert; Frederik Maes; Cindy Mai; Raymond Oyen; Steven Joniau; Martina Kunze-Busch; Karolien Goffin; Karin Haustermans Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 9.236
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: Evyn G Arnfield; Paul A Thomas; Matthew J Roberts; Anita M Pelecanos; Stuart C Ramsay; Charles Y Lin; Melissa J Latter; Peter L Garcia; David A Pattison Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-06-16 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
Authors: Ian Leigh Alberts; Svenja Elizabeth Seide; Clemens Mingels; Karl Peter Bohn; Kuangyu Shi; Helle D Zacho; Axel Rominger; Ali Afshar-Oromieh Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-06 Impact factor: 9.236