Advertisement

Current Urology Reports

, 18:84 | Cite as

Performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for Prostate Cancer Management at Initial Staging and Time of Biochemical Recurrence

  • Jason Bailey
  • Morand PiertEmail author
New Imaging Techniques (S Rais-Bahrami and A George, Section Editors)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on New Imaging Techniques

Abstract

Purpose of the Review

Recently introduced Gallium-68 labeled PSMA-ligands such as HBED-CC (68Ga-PSMA) have shown promise for unmet diagnostic needs in prostate cancer.

Recent Findings

68Ga-PSMA has demonstrated improved detection rates and specificity for prostate cancer compared to standard imaging approaches. In the setting of primary disease, 68Ga-PSMA appears to preferentially identify treatment-relevant intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. There is also a growing evidence that 68Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography (PET) outperforms alternative conventional imaging methods including choline-based radiotracers for the localization of disease sites at biochemical recurrence, particularly at lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (< 1 ng/mL). However, the majority of published work lacks rigorous verification of imaging results.

Summary

68Ga-PSMA offers significant promise for both, primary disease and biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. The evidence base to support 68Ga-PSMA is however still underdeveloped, and more rigorous studies substantiating efficacy are needed.

Keywords

68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC 68Ga-PSMA-11 Prostate cancer Prostate-specific membrane antigen PSMA PET/CT 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Jason Bailey and Morand Piert each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: Of importance

  1. 1.
    Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, Heston WD, Cordon-Cardo C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3(1):81–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Umbricht CA, Benesova M, Schmid RM, Turler A, Schibli R, van der Meulen NP, et al. 44Sc-PSMA-617 for radiotheragnostics in tandem with 177Lu-PSMA-617—preclinical investigations in comparison with 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 68Ga-PSMA-617. EJNMMI Res. 2017;7(1):9.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-017-0257-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rischpler C, Maurer T, Schwaiger M, Eiber M. Intense PSMA-expression using 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in a paravertebral schwannoma mimicking prostate cancer metastasis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(1):193–4.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3235-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sasikumar A, Joy A, Pillai MR, Nanabala R, Anees KM, Jayaprakash PG, et al. Diagnostic value of 68Ga PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging of brain tumors—preliminary analysis. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42(1):e41–e8.  https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001451.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rowe SP, Gorin MA, Hammers HJ, Som Javadi M, Hawasli H, Szabo Z, et al. Imaging of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma with PSMA-targeted 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT. Ann Nucl Med. 2015;29(10):877–82.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-015-1017-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pyka T, Weirich G, Einspieler I, Maurer T, Theisen J, Hatzichristodoulou G, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC PET for differential diagnosis of suggestive lung lesions in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(3):367–71.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.164442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Society AC. Cancer facts and figures. 2016.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barrett T, Turkbey B, Choyke PL. PI-RADS version 2: what you need to know. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(11):1165–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2015.06.093.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Robertson NL, Emberton M, Moore CM. MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: a review of technique and results. Nat Rev Urol. 2013;10(10):589–97.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.196.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2015;68(6):1045–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D, Froemming AT, Gupta RT, Turkbey B, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the PI-RADS version 2 lexicon: a multicenter study of six experienced prostate radiologists. Radiology. 2016;280:152542.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seo JW, Shin SJ, Taik Oh Y, Jung DC, Cho NH, Choi YD, et al. PI-RADS version 2: detection of clinically significant cancer in patients with biopsy Gleason score 6 prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209:W1–9.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.16981.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Piert M, Montgomery J, Kunju LP, Siddiqui J, Rogers V, Rajendiran T, et al. 18F-choline PET/MRI: the additional value of PET for MRI-guided transrectal prostate biopsies. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(7):1065–70.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.170878.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pinaquy JB, De Clermont-Galleran H, Pasticier G, Rigou G, Alberti N, Hindie E, et al. Comparative effectiveness of [(18) F]-fluorocholine PET-CT and pelvic MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging for staging in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Prostate. 2015;75(3):323–31.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.22921.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim YI, Cheon GJ, Paeng JC, Cho JY, Kwak C, Kang KW, et al. Usefulness of MRI-assisted metabolic volumetric parameters provided by simultaneous (18)F-fluorocholine PET/MRI for primary prostate cancer characterization. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(8):1247–56.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3026-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Piert M, El Naqa I, Davenport MS, Incerti E, Mapelli P, Picchio M. PET/MRI and prostate cancer. Clin Transl Imaging. 2016;4(6):473–85.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40336-016-0192-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fendler WP, Schmidt DF, Wenter V, Thierfelder KM, Zach C, Stief C, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT detects the location and extent of primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(11):1720–5.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.172627.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rhee H, Thomas P, Shepherd B, Gustafson S, Vela I, Russell PJ, et al. Prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography may improve the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1261–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.3000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Rauscher I, et al. Simultaneous Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2016;70:829–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Budaus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G, Michl U, Heinzer H, Huland H, et al. Initial experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):393–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schwenck J, Rempp H, Reischl G, Kruck S, Stenzl A, Nikolaou K, et al. Comparison of 68Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and 11C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44(1):92–101.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3490-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sahlmann CO, Meller B, Bouter C, Ritter CO, Strobel P, Lotz J, et al. Biphasic (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC-PET/CT in patients with recurrent and high-risk prostate carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(5):898–905.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3251-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rahbar K, Weckesser M, Huss S, Semjonow A, Breyholz HJ, Schrader AJ, et al. Correlation of intraprostatic tumor extent with 68-Ga-PSMA distribution in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.169243.
  24. 24.
    Kabasakal L, Demirci E, Ocak M, Akyel R, Nematyazar J, Aygun A, et al. Evaluation of PSMA PET/CT imaging using a 68Ga-HBED-CC ligand in patients with prostate cancer and the value of early pelvic imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2015;  https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000290.
  25. 25.
    Giesel FL, Sterzing F, Schlemmer HP, Holland-Letz T, Mier W, Rius M, et al. Intra-individual comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11-PET/CT and multi-parametric MR for imaging of primary prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(8):1400–6.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3346-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    • Zamboglou C, Schiller F, Fechter T, Wieser G, Jilg CA, Chirindel A, et al. (68)Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA PET/CT versus histopathology in primary localized prostate cancer: a voxel-wise comparison. Theranostics. 2016;6(10):1619–28.  https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.15344. Only paper providing 3-dimensional voxel-wise registration of tracer distribution with pathology CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zamboglou C, Wieser G, Hennies S, Rempel I, Kirste S, Soschynski M, et al. MRI versus (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT for gross tumour volume delineation in radiation treatment planning of primary prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(5):889–97.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3257-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Eiber M, Nekolla SG, Maurer T, Weirich G, Wester HJ, Schwaiger M. Ga-PSMA PET/MR with multimodality image analysis for primary prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging. 2014;  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0301-z.
  29. 29.
    • Hijazi S, Meller B, Leitsmann C, Strauss A, Meller J, Ritter CO, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for nodal oligometastatic prostate cancer detected by (68) Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate. 2015;75(16):1934–40.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23091. Histological verification of imaging findings providing sensitivity and specificity of 68Ga-PSMA CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    • Rauscher I, Maurer T, Beer AJ, Graner FP, Haller B, Weirich G, et al. Value of 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET for the assessment of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: comparison with histopathology after salvage lymphadenectomy. J Nucl Med. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.173492. Histological verification of imaging findings providing sensitivity and specificity of 68Ga-PSMA
  31. 31.
    Kabasakal L, Demirci E, Nematyazar J, Akyel R, Razavi B, Ocak M, et al. The role of PSMA PET/CT imaging in restaging of prostate cancer patients with low prostate-specific antigen levels. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38(2):149–55.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000617.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    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. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(8):1185–90.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.160382.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zamboglou C, Drendel V, Jilg CA, Rischke HC, Beck TI, Schultze-Seemann W, et al. Comparison of 68Ga-HBED-CC PSMA-PET/CT and multiparametric MRI for gross tumour volume detection in patients with primary prostate cancer based on slice by slice comparison with histopathology. Theranostics. 2017;7(1):228–37.  https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.16638.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    King CR, McNeal JE, Gill H, Presti JC Jr. Extended prostate biopsy scheme improves reliability of Gleason grading: implications for radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59(2):386–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.10.014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Meyer C, Ma B, Kunju LP, Davenport M, Piert M. Challenges in accurate registration of 3-D medical imaging and histopathology in primary prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(Suppl 1):72–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2382-2.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kupelian PA, Mahadevan A, Reddy CA, Reuther AM, Klein EA. Use of different definitions of biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy changes conclusions about relative treatment efficacy for localized prostate cancer. Urology. 68(3):593–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.03.075.
  37. 37.
    Antonarakis ES, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Carducci MA, Partin AW, et al. The natural history of metastatic progression in men with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2012;109(1):32–9.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10422.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hovels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, Jager GJ, Strum S, Hoogeveen YL, 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):387–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Briganti A, Abdollah F, Nini A, Suardi N, Gallina A, Capitanio U, et al. Performance characteristics of computed tomography in detecting lymph node metastases in contemporary patients with prostate cancer treated with extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Eur Urol. 2012;61(6):1132–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.11.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Afshar-Oromieh A, Roethke MC, Hadaschik BA, Gleave M, et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy is at risk to be missed in 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET of PET/CT and PET/MRI: comparison with mpMRI integrated in simultaneous PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3594-z.
  41. 41.
    Giesel FL, Fiedler H, Stefanova M, Sterzing F, Rius M, Kopka K, et al. PSMA PET/CT with Glu-urea-Lys-(Ahx)-[(6)(8)Ga(HBED-CC)] versus 3D CT volumetric lymph node assessment in recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(12):1794–800.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3106-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    • 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. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(2):197–209.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6. Histological verification of imaging findings providing sensitivity and specificity of 68Ga-PSMA CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    • Pfister D, Porres D, Heidenreich A, Heidegger I, Knuechel R, Steib F, et al. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer lesions before salvage lymphadenectomy is more accurate with (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC than with (18)F-fluoroethylcholine PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(8):1410–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3366-9. Histological verification of imaging findings providing sensitivity and specificity of 68Ga-PSMA CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA-ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(5):668–74.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.154153.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Verburg FA, Pfister D, Heidenreich A, Vogg A, Drude NI, Voo S, et al. Extent of disease in recurrent prostate cancer determined by [(68)Ga]PSMA-HBED-CC PET/CT in relation to PSA levels, PSA doubling time and Gleason score. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(3):397–403.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3240-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bluemel C, Krebs M, Polat B, Linke F, Eiber M, Samnick S, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT in patients with biochemical prostate cancer recurrence and negative 18F-choline-PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001197.
  47. 47.
    Ceci F, Uprimny C, Nilica B, Geraldo L, Kendler D, Kroiss A, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT for restaging recurrent prostate cancer: which factors are associated with PET/CT detection rate? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(8):1284–94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3078-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sachpekidis C, Eder M, Kopka K, Mier W, Hadaschik BA, Haberkorn U, et al. Ga-PSMA-11 dynamic PET/CT imaging in biochemical relapse of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3302-4.
  49. 49.
    Pfister D, Bolla M, Briganti A, Carroll P, Cozzarini C, Joniau S, et al. Early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2014;65(6):1034–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    van Leeuwen PJ, Stricker P, Hruby G, Kneebone A, Ting F, Thompson B, et al. (68) Ga-PSMA has a high detection rate of prostate cancer recurrence outside the prostatic fossa in patients being considered for salvage radiation treatment. BJU Int. 2016;117(5):732–9.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13397.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sterzing F, Kratochwil C, Fiedler H, Katayama S, Habl G, Kopka K, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a new technique with high potential for the radiotherapeutic management of prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(1):34–41.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3188-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Habl G, Sauter K, Schiller K, Dewes S, Maurer T, Eiber M, et al. 68 Ga-PSMA-PET for radiation treatment planning in prostate cancer recurrences after surgery: individualized medicine or new standard in salvage treatment. Prostate. 2017;77(8):920–7.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.23347.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear MedicineUniversity of Michigan Health System, University Hospital B1G505CAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations