BACKGROUND: PSMA-PET is a novel imaging modality for the staging of prostate cancer (PCa). While there are several PSMA ligands available, F-18-PSMA-1007 is particularly of interest as it is not renally excreted and therefore does not impair the imaging of the pelvic area. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the F-18-PSMA-1007-PET for the primary staging of PCa and compared it to multi-parametric (mp) MRI and histopathology. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of men with intermediate and high-risk PCa patients that underwent a F-18-PSMA-1007-PET after mpMRI with subsequent MR-guided target biopsy (MRGB). Suspicious mpMRI lesions and F-18-PSMA-1007-PET were simultaneously reviewed on both a per patient and per-lesion basis. Results were subsequently evaluated with histopathological outcome of MRGB, and if performed, the radical prostatectomy specimen. RESULTS: A total of 66 suspicious mpMRI lesions were identified in 53 patients and underwent MRGB. Two lesions had a maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) less than the mean SUVmax of healthy prostate tissue and were considered as non-PSMA-expressing. All PSMA avid tumors had higher SUVmax than the mean SUVmean of the bladder/urine, therefore all lesions were clearly distinguishable in the pelvic area. Twenty-three patients received a radical prostatectomy of which the histopathology specimens were evaluated. F-18-PSMA-1007-PET/CT correctly staged seminal vesicle invasion (i.e. pT3b) more often than mpMRI (90 vs. 76%), whereas mpMRI more accurately detected extracapsular extension (i.e. pT3a) compared to F-18-PSMA-1007-PET (90% vs 57%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study of a selected cohort suggest that dual imaging with mpMRI and F-18-PSMA-1007-PET may improve staging of primary PCa. F-18-PSMA-1007-PET/CT had low renal clearance, which could assist the evaluation of tumors in proximity of the bladder.
BACKGROUND: PSMA-PET is a novel imaging modality for the staging of prostate cancer (PCa). While there are several PSMA ligands available, F-18-PSMA-1007 is particularly of interest as it is not renally excreted and therefore does not impair the imaging of the pelvic area. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the F-18-PSMA-1007-PET for the primary staging of PCa and compared it to multi-parametric (mp) MRI and histopathology. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of men with intermediate and high-risk PCa patients that underwent a F-18-PSMA-1007-PET after mpMRI with subsequent MR-guided target biopsy (MRGB). Suspicious mpMRI lesions and F-18-PSMA-1007-PET were simultaneously reviewed on both a per patient and per-lesion basis. Results were subsequently evaluated with histopathological outcome of MRGB, and if performed, the radical prostatectomy specimen. RESULTS: A total of 66 suspicious mpMRI lesions were identified in 53 patients and underwent MRGB. Two lesions had a maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) less than the mean SUVmax of healthy prostate tissue and were considered as non-PSMA-expressing. All PSMA avid tumors had higher SUVmax than the mean SUVmean of the bladder/urine, therefore all lesions were clearly distinguishable in the pelvic area. Twenty-three patients received a radical prostatectomy of which the histopathology specimens were evaluated. F-18-PSMA-1007-PET/CT correctly staged seminal vesicle invasion (i.e. pT3b) more often than mpMRI (90 vs. 76%), whereas mpMRI more accurately detected extracapsular extension (i.e. pT3a) compared to F-18-PSMA-1007-PET (90% vs 57%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study of a selected cohort suggest that dual imaging with mpMRI and F-18-PSMA-1007-PET may improve staging of primary PCa. F-18-PSMA-1007-PET/CT had low renal clearance, which could assist the evaluation of tumors in proximity of the bladder.
Authors: Nicolas Mottet; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Erik Briers; Marcus G Cumberbatch; Maria De Santis; Nicola Fossati; Tobias Gross; Ann M Henry; Steven Joniau; Thomas B Lam; Malcolm D Mason; Vsevolod B Matveev; Paul C Moldovan; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Thomas Van den Broeck; Henk G van der Poel; Theo H van der Kwast; Olivier Rouvière; Ivo G Schoots; Thomas Wiegel; Philip Cornford Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Venkata Avinash Chikatamarla; Satomi Okano; Peter Jenvey; Alexander Ansaldo; Matthew J Roberts; Stuart C Ramsay; Paul A Thomas; David A Pattison Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Wei Liu; Andrew Loblaw; David Laidley; Hatim Fakir; Lucas Mendez; Melanie Davidson; Zahra Kassam; Ting-Yim Lee; Aaron Ward; Jonathan Thiessen; Jane Bayani; John Conyngham; Laura Bailey; Joseph D Andrews; Glenn Bauman Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Youssra Allach; Amina Banda; Willemijn van Gemert; Michel de Groot; Yvonne Derks; Melline Schilham; Alexander Hoepping; Lars Perk; Martin Gotthardt; Marcel Janssen; James Nagarajah; Bastiaan M Privé Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Melline G M Schilham; Patrik Zamecnik; Bastiaan M Privé; Bas Israël; Mark Rijpkema; Tom Scheenen; Jelle O Barentsz; James Nagarajah; Martin Gotthardt Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-01-30 Impact factor: 10.057