Vol 27 (2024): Continuous Publishing
Research paper
Published online: 2024-04-29

open access

Page views 224
Article views/downloads 129
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Clinical utility of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in initial staging of patients with prostate cancer and importance of intraprostatic SUVmax values

Ivan Rogic1, Anja Tea Golubic12, Marijan Zuvic1, Tea Smitran1, Nino Jukic1, Marija Gamulin3, Zeljko Kastelan42, Drazen Huic12
Pubmed: 38680016
Nucl. Med. Rev 2024;27:6-12.

Abstract

Background: As in disease recurrence, providing clinicians with the exact extent of the disease at the time of initial diagnosis is key in the management and individual treatment of prostate cancer (PC) patients. Intending to examine the usefulness of gallium- 68 PSMA-11 positron emission tomography/computed tomography ([68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT) and to determine if there is a correlation between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum values, WHO/ISUP (World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology’s) grade group of the tumor and SUVmax (maximized standardized uptake value) values we retrospectively analyzed PET/CT studies performed for initial staging of the disease.

Patients and methods: We retrospectively evaluated 34 studies of patients who underwent [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT as part of the initial staging of prostate cancer. All patients had prostate cancer confirmed by histological assessment after biopsy and had Gleason score and PSA serum values obtained. The mean PSA value was 33.8 ± 40.9 nmol/L (range 2.2–232).

Results: Nineteen patients had extended disease (55.9%). The mean SUVmax in prostate lesions was 19.5 ± 12.6. The mean value of SUVmax of PET studies in the high-risk group was significantly higher than those of low risk (23.5 ± 13.2 and 10.6 ± 5.4, p < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the ISUP group and SUVmax value of prostate lesions (Pearson’s r = 0.557, p < 0.01). A positive correlation was also found in the comparison between PSA values and SUVmax (Pearson’s r = 0.34, p < 0.05).

Conclusions: In our study, [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scans detected the extended disease in more than half of the patients. Locating disease beyond the prostate gland allowed better informed clinical decisions and modified treatment. A positive correlation was found between intraprostatic SUVmax values and the ISUP group of prostate cancer. High-risk patients had SUVmax values that were significantly higher than those of low-risk patients. The correlation between the Gleason score and SUVmax value can be explained by the increased intensity of PSMA expression as the tumor grade increases.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68(6): 394–424 Erratum in: CA Cancer J Clin.
  2. Rawla P. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Oncol. 2019; 10(2): 63–89.
  3. Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021; 79(2): 243–262.
  4. Hövels AM, Heesakkers RAM, Adang EM, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2008; 63(4): 387–395.
  5. Shen G, Deng H, Hu S, et al. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol. 2014; 43(11): 1503–1513.
  6. Mertan FV, Lindenberg L, Choyke PL, et al. PET imaging of recurrent and metastatic prostate cancer with novel tracers. Future Oncol. 2016; 12(21): 2463–2477.
  7. Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020; 77(4): 403–417.
  8. Öbek C, Doğanca T, Demirci E, et al. Members of Urooncology Association, Turkey. The accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary lymph node staging in high-risk prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017; 44(11): 1806–1812.
  9. Sonni I, Eiber M, Fendler WP, et al. Impact of ga-psma-11 PET/CT on staging and management of prostate cancer patients in various clinical settings: a prospective single-center study. J Nucl Med. 2020; 61(8): 1153–1160.
  10. Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al. proPSMA Study Group Collaborators. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020; 395(10231): 1208–1216.
  11. Chow KM, So WZ, Lee HJ, et al. Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and conventional imaging modalities for initial staging of intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2023; 84(1): 36–48.
  12. Ceci F, Oprea-Lager DE, Emmett L, et al. E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021; 48(5): 1626–1638.
  13. Bravaccini S, Puccetti M, Bocchini M, et al. PSMA expression: a potential ally for the pathologist in prostate cancer diagnosis. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1): 4254.
  14. Hupe MC, Philippi C, Roth D, et al. Expression of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) on biopsies is an independent risk stratifier of prostate cancer patients at time of initial diagnosis. Front Oncol. 2018; 8: 623.
  15. Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res. 1997; 3(1): 81–85.
  16. Perner S, Hofer MD, Kim R, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression as a predictor of prostate cancer progression. Hum Pathol. 2007; 38(5): 696–701.
  17. Demirci E, Kabasakal L, Şahin OE, et al. Can SUVmax values of Ga-68-PSMA PET/CT scan predict the clinically significant prostate cancer? Nucl Med Commun. 2019; 40(1): 86–91.
  18. Bodar YJL, Veerman H, Meijer D, et al. Standardised uptake values as determined on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography is associated with oncological outcomes in patients with prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2022; 129(6): 768–776.
  19. Lattouf JB, Saad F. Gleason score on biopsy: is it reliable for predicting the final grade on pathology? BJU Int. 2002; 90(7): 694–698; discussion 698.
  20. Khoddami M, Khademi Y, Kazemi Aghdam M, et al. Correlation between gleason scores in needle biopsy and corresponding radical prostatectomy specimens: a twelve-year review. Iran J Pathol. 2016; 11(2): 120–126.
  21. Sazuka T, Imamoto T, Namekawa T, et al. Analysis of preoperative detection for apex prostate cancer by transrectal biopsy. Prostate Cancer. 2013: 705865.
  22. Wen J, Zhu Y, Li L, et al. Determination of optimal  Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging time in prostate cancers by total-body dynamic PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022; 49(6): 2086–2095.
  23. van der Sar ECA, Viol SL, Braat AJ, et al. Impact of uptake time on image quality of [ Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. Med Phys. 2023; 50(12): 7619–7628.