Esther Mena1, Maria Liza Lindenberg2, Ismail Baris Turkbey2, Joanna H Shih3, Stephanie A Harmon4, Ilhan Lim2, Frank Lin2, Stephen Adler4, Philip Eclarinal2, Yolanda L McKinney2, Deborah Citrin5, William Dahut6, Bradford J Wood7, Venkatesh Krishnasamy7, Richard Chang7, Elliot Levy7, Maria Merino8, Peter Pinto9, Janet F Eary10, Peter L Choyke2. 1. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland esther.menagonzalez@nih.gov. 2. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 3. Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 5. Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 7. Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 8. Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 9. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; and. 10. Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the lesion detection rate of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT, a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET agent, in patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer after primary local therapy. Methods: This was a prospective institutional review board-approved study of 90 patients with documented biochemical recurrence (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA], 2.5 ng/mL; range, 0.21-35.5 ng/mL) and negative results on conventional imaging after primary local therapies, including radical prostatectomy (n = 38), radiation (n = 27), or a combination of the two (n = 25). Patients on androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. Patients underwent whole-body 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT (299.9 ± 15.5 MBq) at 2 h after injection. The PSMA PET lesion detection rate was correlated with PSA, PSA kinetics, and original primary tumor grade. Results: Seventy patients (77.8%) showed positive PSMA PET results, with a total of 287 lesions identified: 37 prostate bed foci, 208 lesions in lymph nodes, and 42 in distant sites in bones or organs, Eleven patients had negative results, and 9 patients showed indeterminate lesions, which were considered negative in this study. The detection rates were 47.6% (n = 10/21), 50% (n = 5/10), 88.9% (n = 8/9), and 94% (n = 47/50) for PSA levels of >0.2 to <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1 to <2.0, and ≥2.0 ng/mL, respectively. In postsurgical patients, PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity correlated with PET results, but the same was not true for postradiation patients. These parameters also correlated with the extent of disease on PET (intrapelvic vs. extrapelvic). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive scans between patients with higher-grade and lower-grade primary tumors (Gleason score of ≥4 + 3 vs. <3 + 4). Tumor recurrence was histology-confirmed in 40% (28/70) of patients. On a per-patient basis, positive predictive value was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 77.6%-99.2%) by histopathologic validation and 96.2% (95% confidence interval, 86.3%-99.7%) by the combination of histology and imaging/clinical follow-up. Conclusion: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging offers high detection rates in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer patients and is positive in about 50% of patients with a PSA level of less than 0.5 ng/mL, which could substantially impact clinical management. In postsurgical patients, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT correlates with PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity, suggesting it may have prognostic value. 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is highly promising for localizing sites of recurrent prostate cancer.
Our objective was to investigate the lesion detection rate of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT, a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET agent, in patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer after primary local therapy. Methods: This was a prospective institutional review board-approved study of 90 patients with documented biochemical recurrence (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA], 2.5 ng/mL; range, 0.21-35.5 ng/mL) and negative results on conventional imaging after primary local therapies, including radical prostatectomy (n = 38), radiation (n = 27), or a combination of the two (n = 25). Patients on androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. Patients underwent whole-body 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT (299.9 ± 15.5 MBq) at 2 h after injection. The PSMA PET lesion detection rate was correlated with PSA, PSA kinetics, and original primary tumor grade. Results: Seventy patients (77.8%) showed positive PSMA PET results, with a total of 287 lesions identified: 37 prostate bed foci, 208 lesions in lymph nodes, and 42 in distant sites in bones or organs, Eleven patients had negative results, and 9 patients showed indeterminate lesions, which were considered negative in this study. The detection rates were 47.6% (n = 10/21), 50% (n = 5/10), 88.9% (n = 8/9), and 94% (n = 47/50) for PSA levels of >0.2 to <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1 to <2.0, and ≥2.0 ng/mL, respectively. In postsurgical patients, PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity correlated with PET results, but the same was not true for postradiation patients. These parameters also correlated with the extent of disease on PET (intrapelvic vs. extrapelvic). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive scans between patients with higher-grade and lower-grade primary tumors (Gleason score of ≥4 + 3 vs. <3 + 4). Tumor recurrence was histology-confirmed in 40% (28/70) of patients. On a per-patient basis, positive predictive value was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 77.6%-99.2%) by histopathologic validation and 96.2% (95% confidence interval, 86.3%-99.7%) by the combination of histology and imaging/clinical follow-up. Conclusion: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging offers high detection rates in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer patients and is positive in about 50% of patients with a PSA level of less than 0.5 ng/mL, which could substantially impact clinical management. In postsurgical patients, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT correlates with PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity, suggesting it may have prognostic value. 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is highly promising for localizing sites of recurrent prostate cancer.
Authors: Sebastian Mannweiler; Peter Amersdorfer; Slave Trajanoski; Jonathan A Terrett; David King; Gabor Mehes Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2008-09-18 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Michael A Gorin; Steven P Rowe; Hiten D Patel; Igor Vidal; Margarita Mana-Ay; Mehrbod S Javadi; Lilja B Solnes; Ashley E Ross; Edward M Schaeffer; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Alan W Partin; Kenneth J Pienta; Zsolt Szabo; Angelo M De Marzo; Martin G Pomper; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Steven P Rowe; Kenneth L Gage; Sheila F Faraj; Katarzyna J Macura; Toby C Cornish; Nilda Gonzalez-Roibon; Gunes Guner; Enrico Munari; Alan W Partin; Christian P Pavlovich; Misop Han; H Ballentine Carter; Trinity J Bivalacqua; Amanda Blackford; Daniel Holt; Robert F Dannals; George J Netto; Martin A Lodge; Ronnie C Mease; Martin G Pomper; Steve Y Cho Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 10.057
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: Zsolt Szabo; Esther Mena; Steven P Rowe; Donika Plyku; Rosa Nidal; Mario A Eisenberger; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Hong Fan; Robert F Dannals; Ying Chen; Ronnie C Mease; Melin Vranesic; Akrita Bhatnagar; George Sgouros; Steve Y Cho; Martin G Pomper Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Marlon Perera; Nathan Papa; Matthew Roberts; Michael Williams; Cristian Udovicich; Ian Vela; Daniel Christidis; Damien Bolton; Michael S Hofman; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Declan G Murphy Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2019-02-14 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jeffrey S Ross; Christine E Sheehan; Hugh A G Fisher; Ronald P Kaufman; Prabhjot Kaur; Karen Gray; Iain Webb; Gary S Gray; Rebecca Mosher; Bhaskar V S Kallakury Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2003-12-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Wolfgang P Fendler; Jeremie Calais; Matthias Eiber; Robert R Flavell; Ashley Mishoe; Felix Y Feng; Hao G Nguyen; Robert E Reiter; Matthew B Rettig; Shozo Okamoto; Louise Emmett; Helle D Zacho; Harun Ilhan; Axel Wetter; Christoph Rischpler; Heiko Schoder; Irene A Burger; Jeannine Gartmann; Raven Smith; Eric J Small; Roger Slavik; Peter R Carroll; Ken Herrmann; Johannes Czernin; Thomas A Hope Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Esther Mena; Steven P Rowe; Joanna H Shih; Liza Lindenberg; Baris Turkbey; Aloyse Fourquet; Frank I Lin; Stephen Adler; Philip Eclarinal; Yolanda L McKinney; Deborah E Citrin; William Dahut; Bradford J Wood; Richard Chang; Elliot Levy; Maria Merino; Michael A Gorin; Martin G Pomper; Peter A Pinto; Janet F Eary; Peter L Choyke; Kenneth J Pienta Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Kilian E Salerno; Baris Turkbey; Liza Lindenberg; Esther Mena; Erica E Schott; Alexandra K Brennan; Soumyajit Roy; Uma Shankavaram; Krishnan Patel; Theresa Cooley-Zgela; Yolanda McKinney; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter Choyke; Deborah E Citrin Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 2.441
Authors: Michael J Morris; Steven P Rowe; Michael A Gorin; Lawrence Saperstein; Frédéric Pouliot; David Josephson; Jeffrey Y C Wong; Austin R Pantel; Steve Y Cho; Kenneth L Gage; Morand Piert; Andrei Iagaru; Janet H Pollard; Vivien Wong; Jessica Jensen; Tess Lin; Nancy Stambler; Peter R Carroll; Barry A Siegel Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 13.801