Liran Domachevsky1, Hanna Bernstine1,2, Natalia Goldberg1, Meital Nidam1, Onofrio A Catalano3, David Groshar4,5. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel Street, 6971028, Tel Aviv, Israel. 2. Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O. Box 39040, 6997801, Tel Aviv, Israel. 3. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA, USA. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Assuta Medical Centers, 20 Habarzel Street, 6971028, Tel Aviv, Israel. dgroshar@zahav.net.il. 5. Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O. Box 39040, 6997801, Tel Aviv, Israel. dgroshar@zahav.net.il.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Despite the advantages of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/MR over PSMA-PET/CT, its relatively long scanning time and suboptimal PET attenuation correction necessitate careful assessment of the most appropriate setting for this type of study. We assessed lesion agreement between PSMA-PET/MR and PSMA-PET/CT in patients undergoing initial evaluation of prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a prospective study of consecutive patients with histological biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent pelvic PSMA-PET/MR followed by whole-body PSMA-PET/CT. All conspicuous PSMA-avid foci were counted on PSMA-PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR with CT or MR correlation. Analysis was performed for intra-prostatic lesions, capsular invasion, seminal vesicle involvement and lymph node and bone involvement. Incidental and significant findings seen on PSMA-PET/CT outside the PSMA-PET/MR field of view were also analysed. Agreements between PSMA-PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR findings were performed using Cohen's kappa test. RESULTS: Image analysis was performed on 140 patients (mean age, 67.3 ± 8.2 years). Agreement between PSMA PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR was very good for intra-prostatic PSMA-avid foci (K = 0.85) and pelvic lymph nodes (K = 0.98), good for PSMA-avid bone metastases (K = 0.76) and fair for prostatic capsular invasion (K = 0.25) and seminal vesicle involvement (K = 0.31). Twelve patients (8.5%) had incidental findings and two patients (1.4%) had clinically significant findings. CONCLUSION: Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR has very good agreement with PET/CT regarding PSMA-avid prostatic, regional lymph nodes and bone lesions, and is superior to PET/CT with regard to capsular invasion and seminal vesicle involvement. KEY POINTS: • Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR is superior to whole-body PSMA-PET/CT in detecting extensions of localised disease, mainly due to the high soft tissue resolution of MR. • Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR may be useful for initial evaluation of histological biopsy-proven prostate cancer. • Further studies are warranted to evaluate limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR for screening and active surveillance in selected populations.
OBJECTIVES: Despite the advantages of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/MR over PSMA-PET/CT, its relatively long scanning time and suboptimal PET attenuation correction necessitate careful assessment of the most appropriate setting for this type of study. We assessed lesion agreement between PSMA-PET/MR and PSMA-PET/CT in patients undergoing initial evaluation of prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a prospective study of consecutive patients with histological biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent pelvic PSMA-PET/MR followed by whole-body PSMA-PET/CT. All conspicuous PSMA-avid foci were counted on PSMA-PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR with CT or MR correlation. Analysis was performed for intra-prostatic lesions, capsular invasion, seminal vesicle involvement and lymph node and bone involvement. Incidental and significant findings seen on PSMA-PET/CT outside the PSMA-PET/MR field of view were also analysed. Agreements between PSMA-PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR findings were performed using Cohen's kappa test. RESULTS: Image analysis was performed on 140 patients (mean age, 67.3 ± 8.2 years). Agreement between PSMA PET/CT and PSMA-PET/MR was very good for intra-prostatic PSMA-avid foci (K = 0.85) and pelvic lymph nodes (K = 0.98), good for PSMA-avid bone metastases (K = 0.76) and fair for prostatic capsular invasion (K = 0.25) and seminal vesicle involvement (K = 0.31). Twelve patients (8.5%) had incidental findings and two patients (1.4%) had clinically significant findings. CONCLUSION: Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR has very good agreement with PET/CT regarding PSMA-avid prostatic, regional lymph nodes and bone lesions, and is superior to PET/CT with regard to capsular invasion and seminal vesicle involvement. KEY POINTS: • Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR is superior to whole-body PSMA-PET/CT in detecting extensions of localised disease, mainly due to the high soft tissue resolution of MR. • Limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR may be useful for initial evaluation of histological biopsy-proven prostate cancer. • Further studies are warranted to evaluate limited pelvic PSMA-PET/MR for screening and active surveillance in selected populations.
Authors: I Berger; C Annabattula; J Lewis; D V Shetty; J Kam; F Maclean; M Arianayagam; B Canagasingham; R Ferguson; M Khadra; R Ko; M Winter; H Loh; C Varol Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: A Afshar-Oromieh; U Haberkorn; H P Schlemmer; M Fenchel; M Eder; M Eisenhut; B A Hadaschik; A Kopp-Schneider; M Röthke Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-12-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Sonya Youngju Park; Claudia Zacharias; Caitlyn Harrison; Richard E Fan; Christian Kunder; Negin Hatami; Frederik Giesel; Pejman Ghanouni; Bruce Daniel; Andreas M Loening; Geoffrey A Sonn; Andrei Iagaru Journal: Radiology Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Luke A Matkovic; Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Oladunni O Akin-Akintayo; Olayinka A Abiodun Ojo; Akinyemi A Akintayo; Justin Roper; Jeffery D Bradley; Tian Liu; David M Schuster; Xiaofeng Yang Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: J Orcajo-Rincon; J Muñoz-Langa; J M Sepúlveda-Sánchez; G C Fernández-Pérez; M Martínez; E Noriega-Álvarez; S Sanz-Viedma; J C Vilanova; A Luna Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2022-02-13 Impact factor: 3.340
Authors: Liran Domachevsky; Natalia Goldberg; Miguel Gorenberg; Hanna Bernstine; David Groshar; Onofrio A Catalano Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2020-01
Authors: Jad S Husseini; Bárbara Juarez Amorim; Angel Torrado-Carvajal; Vinay Prabhu; David Groshar; Lale Umutlu; Ken Herrmann; Lina García Cañamaque; José Ramón García Garzón; William E Palmer; Pedram Heidari; Tiffany Ting-Fang Shih; Jacob Sosna; Cristina Matushita; Juliano Cerci; Marcelo Queiroz; Valdair Francisco Muglia; Marcello H Nogueira-Barbosa; Ronald J H Borra; Thomas C Kwee; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Laura Evangelista; Marco Salvatore; Alberto Cuocolo; Andrea Soricelli; Christian Herold; Andrea Laghi; Marius Mayerhoefer; Umar Mahmood; Ciprian Catana; Heike E Daldrup-Link; Bruce Rosen; Onofrio A Catalano Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-22 Impact factor: 9.236