Abstract
Purpose
68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT is commonly performed at 1 h post injection (p.i.). However, various publications have demonstrated that most prostate cancer (PC) lesions exhibit higher contrast at later imaging. The aim of this study was to compare the “common” protocol of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT with a modified protocol.
Methods
In 2017, we used the following scanning protocol for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in patients with recurrent PC: acquisition at 1 h p.i. without further preparations. From 2018, all scans were conducted at 1.5 h p.i. In addition, patients were orally hydrated with 1 L of water 0.5 h p.i. and were injected with 20 mg of furosemide 1 h p.i. Both protocols including 112 patients (2017) and 156 (modified protocol in 2018) were retrospectively compared. Rates of pathologic scans, maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax), and tumor contrast (ratio lesion-SUVmax/background-SUVmean) as well as average standardized uptake values (SUVmean) of urinary bladder were analyzed.
Results
Both tumor contrast and tracer uptake were significantly (p < 0.001) higher in the novel protocol. Although statistically not significant, the rates of pathologic scans were also higher in the modified protocol: 76.3% vs. 68.8% for all PSA values including 38.9% vs. 25.0% for PSA < 0.5 ng/ml and 60.0% vs. 56.7% for PSA > 0.5–≤ 2.0 ng/ml. Average SUVmean of the urinary bladder was significantly (p < 0.001) lower with the modified protocol.
Conclusions
The modified protocol, which includes a combination of delayed image acquisition at 1.5 h p.i., hydration, and furosemide resulted in higher tumor contrast and seems to have the potential to increase the rates of pathological scans, especially at low PSA levels.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Schwenck J, Rempp H, Reischl G, Kruck S, Stenzl A, Nikolaou K, et al. Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2017;44:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3490-6.
Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive (68)Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European urology. 2016;70:926–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021.
Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, Tang R, Ho B, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. Journal of nuclear medicine. 2015;56:1185–90. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.160382.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG, Hadaschik BA, et al. PET imaging with a [68Ga]gallium-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: biodistribution in humans and first evaluation of tumour lesions. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2013;40:486–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-012-2298-2.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Linhart HG, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2014;41:11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2525-5.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68) Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2015;42:197–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6.
Israeli RS, Powell CT, Corr JG, Fair WR, Heston WD. Expression of the prostate-specific membrane antigen. Cancer research. 1994;54:1807–11.
Chang SS. Overview of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Reviews in urology. 2004;6(Suppl 10):S13–8.
Wright GL Jr, Grob BM, Haley C, Grossman K, Newhall K, Petrylak D, et al. Upregulation of prostate-specific membrane antigen after androgen-deprivation therapy. Urology. 1996;48:326–34.
Sweat SD, Pacelli A, Murphy GP, Bostwick DG. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression is greatest in prostate adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases. Urology. 1998;52:637–40.
Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Ceci F, Cho S, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2017;44:1014–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3670-z.
Sahlmann CO, Meller B, Bouter C, Ritter CO, Strobel P, Lotz J, et al. Biphasic (6)(8)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC-PET/CT in patients with recurrent and high-risk prostate carcinoma. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2016;43:898–905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3251-y.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kubler W, Kratochwil C, Giesel FL, Hope TA, et al. Radiation dosimetry of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) and preliminary evaluation of optimal imaging timing. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2016;43:1611–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3419-0.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Debus N, Uhrig M, Hope TA, Evans MJ, Holland-Letz T, et al. Impact of long-term androgen deprivation therapy on PSMA ligand PET/CT in patients with castration-sensitive prostate cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2018;45:2045–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4079-z.
Eder M, Neels O, Muller M, Bauder-Wust U, Remde Y, Schafer M, et al. Novel preclinical and radiopharmaceutical aspects of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC: a new PET tracer for imaging of prostate cancer. Pharmaceuticals. 2014;7:779–96. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph7070779.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Sattler LP, Mier W, Hadaschik BA, Debus J, Holland-Letz T, et al. The clinical impact of additional late PET/CT imaging with (68)Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Journal of nuclear medicine. 2017;58:750–5. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.183483.
Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid (6)(8)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Journal of nuclear medicine. 2015;56:668–74. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.154153.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Holland-Letz T, Giesel FL, Kratochwil C, Mier W, Haufe S, et al. Diagnostic performance of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: evaluation in 1007 patients. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2017;44:1258–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3711-7.
Caroli P, Sandler I, Matteucci F, De Giorgi U, Uccelli L, Celli M, et al. (68) Ga-PSMA PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer after radical treatment: prospective results in 314 patients. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2018;45:2035–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4067-3.
Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, Flavell RR, Mishoe A, Feng FY, et al. Assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy in localizing recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0096.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All patients published in this manuscript signed a written informed consent form for the purpose of anonymized evaluation and publication of their data. This evaluation was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Bern (KEK-Nr. 2018-00299).
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Oncology – Genitourinary
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Haupt, F., Dijkstra, L., Alberts, I. et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer—a modified protocol compared with the common protocol. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47, 624–631 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04548-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04548-5