BACKGROUND: In the current study we evaluated 68Ga PSMA PET/ CT to measure local control of bone metastasis in oligometastatic prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After the institutional review board approval, a retrospective review of medical records of consecutive prostate cancer patients treated between 2014 and 2018 was conducted. Only medical records of patients that were treated with SBRT for bone metastasis and had pre-and post-SBRT 68Ga PSMA PET/CT scans were included in our study. Data extracted from the medical files included patient-related (age), disease-related (Gleason score, site of metastasis), and treatment-related factors and outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 12 patients (15 lesions) were included, with a median age of 73 years. The median follow-up was 26.5 months (range 13-45 months). Median time of 68Ga PSMA PET/ CT follow up was 17.0 months (range 3-39 months). The median pre-treatment PSA was 2 ng/mL (range 0.56-44 ng/mL) vs. post treatment PSA nadir of 0.01 ng/mL (0.01-4.32) with a median time to nadir of 7 months (range, 2-12). Local control was 93% during the follow up period and there was correlation with PS MA avidity on PE T. None patients developed recurrences in the treated bone. None of the patients had grade 3 or more toxicities during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is a highly effective and safe method for treatment of prostate cancer bone metastases. More studies are required to determine if SBRT provides greater clinical benefit than standard fractionation for oligometastatic prostate cancer patients. 68Ga PSMA PET/CT should be further investigated for delineation and follow-up.
BACKGROUND: In the current study we evaluated 68Ga PSMA PET/ CT to measure local control of bone metastasis in oligometastatic prostate cancer patients treated with SBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After the institutional review board approval, a retrospective review of medical records of consecutive prostate cancer patients treated between 2014 and 2018 was conducted. Only medical records of patients that were treated with SBRT for bone metastasis and had pre-and post-SBRT 68Ga PSMA PET/CT scans were included in our study. Data extracted from the medical files included patient-related (age), disease-related (Gleason score, site of metastasis), and treatment-related factors and outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 12 patients (15 lesions) were included, with a median age of 73 years. The median follow-up was 26.5 months (range 13-45 months). Median time of 68Ga PSMA PET/ CT follow up was 17.0 months (range 3-39 months). The median pre-treatment PSA was 2 ng/mL (range 0.56-44 ng/mL) vs. post treatment PSA nadir of 0.01 ng/mL (0.01-4.32) with a median time to nadir of 7 months (range, 2-12). Local control was 93% during the follow up period and there was correlation with PS MA avidity on PE T. None patients developed recurrences in the treated bone. None of the patients had grade 3 or more toxicities during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT is a highly effective and safe method for treatment of prostate cancer bone metastases. More studies are required to determine if SBRT provides greater clinical benefit than standard fractionation for oligometastatic prostate cancer patients. 68Ga PSMA PET/CT should be further investigated for delineation and follow-up.
Authors: Brett W Cox; Daniel E Spratt; Michael Lovelock; Mark H Bilsky; Eric Lis; Samuel Ryu; Jason Sheehan; Peter C Gerszten; Eric Chang; Iris Gibbs; Scott Soltys; Arjun Sahgal; Joe Deasy; John Flickinger; Mubina Quader; Stefan Mindea; Yoshiya Yamada Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-05-19 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Gillian Bedard; Rachel McDonald; Ian Poon; Darby Erler; Hany Soliman; Patrick Cheung; Hans Chung; William Chu; Andrew Loblaw; Edward Chow; Arjun Sahgal Journal: Ann Palliat Med Date: 2016-01
Authors: Edward Y Kim; Tobias R Chapman; Samuel Ryu; Eric L Chang; Nicholas Galanopoulos; Joshua Jones; Charlotte D Kubicky; Charles P Lee; Bin S Teh; Bryan J Traughber; Catherine Van Poznak; Andrew D Vassil; Kristy Weber; Simon Shek-Man Lo Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Amine Slaoui; S Albisinni; F Aoun; G Assenmacher; W Al Hajj Obeid; R Diamand; S Regragui; A Touzani; A Bakar; A Mesfioui; T Karmouni; A Ameur; K Elkhader; A Koutani; A Ibnattya; T Roumeguere; A Peltier Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ryan Phillips; William Yue Shi; Matthew Deek; Noura Radwan; Su Jin Lim; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Steven P Rowe; Ashley E Ross; Michael A Gorin; Curtiland Deville; Stephen C Greco; Hailun Wang; Samuel R Denmeade; Channing J Paller; Shirl Dipasquale; Theodore L DeWeese; Daniel Y Song; Hao Wang; Michael A Carducci; Kenneth J Pienta; Martin G Pomper; Adam P Dicker; Mario A Eisenberger; Ash A Alizadeh; Maximilian Diehn; Phuoc T Tran Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 31.777