Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of choline influx from dynamic 18F-Choline PET/CT and clinicopathological parameters in prostate cancer initial assessment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

The aim of the study was to compare the kinetic analysis of 18F-labeled choline (FCH) uptake with static analysis and clinicopathological parameters in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PC).

Materials and methods

Sixty-one patients were included. PSA was performed few days before FCH PET/CT. Gleason scoring (GS) was collected from systematic sextant biopsies. FCH PET/CT consisted in a dual phase: early pelvic list-mode acquisition (from 0 to10 min post-injection) and late whole-body acquisition (60 min post-injection). PC volume of interest was drawn using an adaptative thresholding (40% of the maximal uptake) on the late acquisition and projected onto an early static frame of 10 min and each of the 20 reconstructed frames of 30 s. Kinetic analysis was performed using an imaging-derived plasma input function. Early kinetic parameter (K1 as influx) and static parameters (early SUVmean, late SUVmean, and retention index) were extracted and compared to clinicopathological parameters.

Results

K1 was significantly, but moderately correlated with early SUVmean (r = 0.57, p < 0.001) and late SUVmean (r = 0.43, p < 0.001). K1, early SUVmean, and late SUVmean were moderately correlated with PSA level (respectively, r = 0.36, p = 0.004; r = 0.67, p < 0.001; r = 0.51, p < 0.001). Concerning GS, K1 was higher for patients with GS ≥ 4 + 3 than for patients with GS < 4 + 3 (median value 0.409 vs 0.272 min− 1, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed for static parameters.

Conclusions

FCH influx index K1 seems to be related to GS and could be a non-invasive tool to gain further information concerning tumor aggressiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhou CK, Check DP, Lortet-Tieulent J, Laversanne M, Jemal A, Ferlay J, et al. Prostate cancer incidence in 43 populations worldwide: An analysis of time trends overall and by age group. Int J Cancer. 2016;138(6):1388–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cimitan M, Evangelista L, Hodolic M, Mariani G, Baseric T, Bodanza V, et al. Gleason score at diagnosis predicts the rate of detection of 18F-choline PET/CT performed when biochemical evidence indicates recurrence of prostate cancer: experience with 1,000 patients. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2015;56(2):209–15.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Oyen WJ, De Jong IJ. Molecular imaging of prostate cancer: tapping into the opportunities. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2015;56(2):169–70.

    Google Scholar 

  4. DeGrado TR, Baldwin SW, Wang S, Orr MD, Liao RP, Friedman HS, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of (18)F-labeled choline analogs as oncologic PET tracers. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2001;42(12):1805–14.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. DeGrado TR, Reiman RE, Price DT, Wang S, Coleman RE. Pharmacokinetics and radiation dosimetry of 18F-fluorocholine. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2002;43(1):92–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jadvar H. Prostate cancer: PET with 18F-FDG, 18F- or 11C-acetate, and 18F- or 11C-choline. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2011;52(1):81–9.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cornford P, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, De Santis M, Gross T, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):630–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwarzenbock S, Souvatzoglou M, Krause BJ. Choline PET and PET/CT in primary diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. Theranostics. 2012;2(3):318–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rodrigues G, Warde P, Pickles T, Crook J, Brundage M, Souhami L, et al. Pre-treatment risk stratification of prostate cancer patients: a critical review. Can Urol Assoc J J de l’Assoc des Urol du Can. 2012;6(2):121–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Boychak O, Vos L, Makis W, Buteau FA, Pervez N, Parliament M, et al. Role for (11)C-choline PET in active surveillance of prostate cancer. Can Urol Assoc J J de l’Assoc des Urol du Can. 2015;9(3–4):E98–E103.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Beheshti M, Haim S, Zakavi R, Steinmair M, Waldenberger P, Kunit T, et al. Impact of 18F-choline PET/CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: influence of androgen deprivation therapy and correlation with PSA kinetics. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2013;54(6):833–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Garcia-Parra R, Briganti A, Abdollah F, Gianolli L, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT predicts prostate cancer-specific survival in patients with biochemical failure during androgen-deprivation therapy. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2014;55(2):233–41.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, Tang R, Ho B, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2015;56(8):1185–90.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Beheshti M, Langsteger W. PET imaging of prostate cancer using radiolabeled choline. PET Clinics. 2009;4(2):173–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chondrogiannis S, Marzola MC, Grassetto G, Rampin L, Massaro A, Colletti PM, et al. Optimized protocol for (18)F-choline PET/CT in patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer: experiences on 250 consecutive cases. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(6):e308-12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Choi JY, Yang J, Noworolski SM, Behr S, Chang AJ, Simko JP, et al. 18F fluorocholine dynamic time-of-flight PET/MR imaging in patients with newly diagnosed intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: initial clinical-pathologic comparisons. Radiology. 2017;282(2):429–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mathieu C, Ferrer L, Carlier T, Colombie M, Rusu D, Kraeber-Bodere F, et al. Assessment of lymph nodes and prostate status using early dynamic curves with (18)F-choline PET/CT in prostate cancer. Front Med. 2015;2:67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosenkrantz AB, Koesters T, Vahle AK, Friedman K, Bartlett RM, Taneja SS, et al. Quantitative graphical analysis of simultaneous dynamic PET/MRI for assessment of prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(4):e236–e240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Takesh M. Kinetic modeling application to (18)F-fluoroethylcholine positron emission tomography in patients with primary and recurrent prostate cancer using two-tissue compartmental model. World J Nucl Med. 2013;12(3):101–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kristian A, Revheim ME, Qu H, Maelandsmo GM, Engebraten O, Seierstad T, et al. Dynamic (18)F-FDG-PET for monitoring treatment effect following anti-angiogenic therapy in triple-negative breast cancer xenografts. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(7):1566–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schierz JH, Opfermann T, Steenbeck J, Lopatta E, Settmacher U, Stallmach A, et al. Early dynamic 18F-FDG PET to detect hyperperfusion in hepatocellular carcinoma liver lesions. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2013;54(6):848 – 54.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Strauss LG, Koczan D, Klippel S, Pan L, Willis S, Sachpekidis C, et al. Dynamic PET with (18)F-deoxyglucose (FDG) and quantitative assessment with a two-tissue compartment model reflect the activity of glucose transporters and hexokinases in patients with colorectal tumors. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;3(5):417 – 24.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Schaefferkoetter JD, Wang Z, Stephenson MC, Roy S, Conti M, Eriksson L, et al. Quantitative 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography for prostate cancer: correlation between kinetic parameters and Gleason scoring. EJNMMI Res. 2017;7(1):25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Daisne JF, Duprez T, Weynand B, Lonneux M, Hamoir M, Reychler H, et al. Tumor volume in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison at CT, MR imaging, and FDG PET and validation with surgical specimen. Radiology. 2004;233(1):93–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Verwer EE, Oprea-Lager DE, van den Eertwegh AJ, van Moorselaar RJ, Windhorst AD, Schwarte LA, et al. Quantification of 18F-fluorocholine kinetics in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2015;56(3):365–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Beheshti M, Imamovic L, Broinger G, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Stoiber F, et al. 18F choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. Radiology. 2010;254(3):925–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. de Perrot T, Rager O, Scheffler M, Lord M, Pusztaszeri M, Iselin C, et al. Potential of hybrid (1)(8)F-fluorocholine PET/MRI for prostate cancer imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:1744–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Evangelista L, Briganti A, Fanti S, Joniau S, Reske S, Schiavina R, et al. New clinical indications for (18)F/(11)C-choline, new tracers for positron emission tomography and a promising hybrid device for prostate cancer staging: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2016;70(1):161–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Krause BJ, Souvatzoglou M, Tuncel M, Herrmann K, Buck AK, Praus C, et al. The detection rate of [11C]choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(1):18–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Nanni C, Santi I, Rizzello A, Lodi F, et al. Influence of trigger PSA and PSA kinetics on 11C-choline PET/CT detection rate in patients with biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2009;50(9):1394–400.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mapelli P, Incerti E, Ceci F, Castellucci P, Fanti S, Picchio M. 11C- or 18F-choline PET/CT for imaging evaluation of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2016;57(Suppl 3):43S-48S.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kwee SA, Wei H, Sesterhenn I, Yun D, Coel MN. Localization of primary prostate cancer with dual-phase 18F-fluorocholine PET. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2006;47(2):262–9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France

    Xavier Palard-Novello, Anne-Lise Blin, Etienne Garin, Patrick Bourguet, Florence Le Jeune & Hervé Saint-Jalmes

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Eugène Marquis, Avenue de la Bataille Flandres-Dunkerque, 35000, Rennes, France

    Xavier Palard-Novello, Etienne Garin, Anne Devillers, Florence Le Jeune & Hervé Saint-Jalmes

  3. UMR1099 INSERM, Rennes, France

    Xavier Palard-Novello, Anne-Lise Blin & Hervé Saint-Jalmes

  4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Brest, France

    David Bourhis, Pierre-Yves Salaün & Solène Querellou

  5. UMR 1241 INSERM, Rennes, France

    Etienne Garin

  6. University of Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, France

    Pierre-Yves Salaün & Solène Querellou

  7. EA 3878, Brest, France

    Pierre-Yves Salaün & Solène Querellou

  8. EA 4712, Rennes, France

    Florence Le Jeune

Authors
  1. Xavier Palard-Novello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne-Lise Blin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Bourhis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Etienne Garin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pierre-Yves Salaün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Anne Devillers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Solène Querellou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Patrick Bourguet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Florence Le Jeune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hervé Saint-Jalmes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xavier Palard-Novello.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palard-Novello, X., Blin, AL., Bourhis, D. et al. Comparison of choline influx from dynamic 18F-Choline PET/CT and clinicopathological parameters in prostate cancer initial assessment. Ann Nucl Med 32, 281–287 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-018-1246-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-018-1246-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation