Prostate Cancer: Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron-emission Tomography/Computed Tomography or Positron-emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Staging.
Journal
Topics in magnetic resonance imaging : TMRI
ISSN: 1536-1004
Titre abrégé: Top Magn Reson Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8913523
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
entrez:
5
2
2020
pubmed:
6
2
2020
medline:
25
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Positron-emission tomography (PET) with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has been increasingly used to image prostate cancer in the last decade. In the staging setting several studies have already been published suggesting PSMA PET can be a valuable tool. They, however, did not translate into recommendations by guidelines. Both PSMA PET/computed tomography (CT) and PET/magnetic resonance imaging have been investigated in the staging setting, showing higher detection rate of prostate cancer lesions over the conventional imaging work-up and some studies already showed an impact on disease management. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the existing published data regarding PSMA PET for staging prostate cancer, with emphasis on PET/magnetic resonance imaging. Despite the fact that PSMA is a relatively new tool and not officially recommended for staging yet, there are >50 original studies in the literature assessing PSMA PET performance in the staging setting of prostate cancer, and some meta-analyses.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32015295
doi: 10.1097/RMR.0000000000000229
pii: 00002142-202002000-00005
doi:
Substances chimiques
Prostate-Specific Antigen
EC 3.4.21.77
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
59-66Références
Becker AS, Chaitanya K, Schawkat K, et al. Variability of manual segmentation of the prostate in axial T2-weighted MRI: a multi-reader study. Eur J Radiol 2019; 121:108716.
Mayerhoefer ME, Prosch H, Beer L, et al. PET/MRI versus PET/CT in oncology: a prospective single-center study of 330 examinations focusing on implications for patient management and cost considerations. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; doi: 10.1007/s00259-019-04452-y.
doi: 10.1007/s00259-019-04452-y
Grubmuller B, Baltzer P, Hartenbach S, et al. PSMA ligand PET/MRI for primary prostate cancer: staging performance and clinical impact. Clin Cancer Res 2018; 24:6300–6307.
Zhang J, Shao S, Wu P, et al. Diagnostic performance of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the detection of prostate cancer prior to initial biopsy: comparison with cancer-predicting nomograms. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 46:908–920.
Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, et al. Simultaneous (68)Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2016; 70:829–836.
Donato P, Roberts MJ, Morton A, et al. Improved specificity with (68)Ga PSMA PET/CT to detect clinically significant lesions “invisible” on multiparametric MRI of the prostate: a single institution comparative analysis with radical prostatectomy histology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 46:20–30.
Berger I, Annabattula C, Lewis J, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT vs. mpMRI for locoregional prostate cancer staging: correlation with final histopathology. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 21:204–211.
Hoffmann MA, Miederer M, Wieler HJ, et al. Diagnostic performance of (68)Gallium-PSMA-11 PET/CT to detect significant prostate cancer and comparison with (18)FEC PET/CT. Oncotarget 2017; 8:111073–111083.
Basha MAA, Hamed MAG, Hussein O, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in newly diagnosed prostate cancer: diagnostic sensitivity and interobserver agreement. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:2545–2556.
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; 40:86–91.
Hirmas N, Al-Ibraheem A, Herrmann K, et al. [(68)Ga]PSMA PET/CT improves initial staging and management plan of patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2019; 21:574–581.
Kalapara AA, Nzenza T, Pan HY, et al. Detection and localisation of primary prostate cancer using (68) Ga-PSMA PET/CT compared with mpMRI and radical prostatectomy specimens. BJU Int 2019; doi:10.1111/bju.14858.
doi: 10.1111/bju.14858
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 2019; doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049
Park SY, Zacharias C, Harrison C, et al. Gallium 68 PSMA-11 PET/MR imaging in patients with intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer. Radiology 2018; 288:495–505.
Yaxley JW, Raveenthiran S, Nouhaud FX, et al. Risk of metastatic disease on (68) Ga-PSMA PET/CT scan for primary staging of 1253 men at the diagnosis of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2019; 124:401–407.
Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of (68)gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2016; 195:1436–1443.
Woythal N, et al. Immunohistochemical validation of PSMA expression measured by (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2018; 59:238–243.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69:16–40.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol 2019; 76:340–351.
Mansbridge M, Chung E, Rhee H. The use of MRI and PET imaging studies for prostate cancer management: brief update, clinical recommendations, and technological limitations. Med Sci (Basel) 2019; 7:pii: E85.
Sheridan AD, Nath SK, Syed JS, et al. Risk of clinically significant prostate cancer associated with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3 (equivocal) lesions identified on multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210:347–357.
Pizzuto DA, Müller J, Mühlematter U, et al. The central zone has increased (68)Ga-PSMA-11 uptake: “Mickey Mouse ears” can be hot on (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018; 45:1335–1343.
Ferraro DA, Rupp NJ, Donati OF, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MR can be false positive in normal prostatic tissue. Clin Nucl Med 2019; 44:e291–e293.
Yilmaz B, Turkay R, Colakoglu Y, et al. Comparison of preoperative locoregional Ga-68 PSMA-11 PET-CT and mp-MRI results with postoperative histopathology of prostate cancer. Prostate 2019; 79:1007–1017.
Muehlematter UJ, Burger IA, Becker AS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI versus (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion in patients with prostate cancer. Radiology 2019; 293:350–358.
Eiber M, Nekolla SG, Maurer T, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/MR with multimodality image analysis for primary prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 2015; 40:1769–1771.
Ringheim A, Campos Neto GC, Martins KM, et al. Reproducibility of standardized uptake values of same-day randomized (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and PET/MR scans in recurrent prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med 2018; 32:523–531.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Schlemmer HP, et al. Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41:887–897.
Guberina N, Hetkamp P, Ruebben H, et al. Whole-body integrated [(68)Ga]PSMA-11-PET/MR imaging in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: comparison with whole-body PET/CT as the standard of reference. Mol Imaging Biol 2019. [Epub ahead of print].
Spick C, Herrmann K, Czernin J. 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI perform equally well in cancer: evidence from studies on more than 2,300 patients. J Nucl Med 2016; 57:420–430.
Morsing A, Hildebrandt MG, Vilstrup MH, et al. Hybrid PET/MRI in major cancers: a scoping review. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 46:2138–2151.
Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Takei T, et al. Comparison of integrated whole-body [11C]choline PET/MR with PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40:1486–1499.
Catalano OA, Rosen BR, Sahani DV, et al. Clinical impact of PET/MR imaging in patients with cancer undergoing same-day PET/CT: initial experience in 134 patients–a hypothesis-generating exploratory study. Radiology 2013; 269:857–869.
Lindenberg L, Ahlman M, Turkbey B, et al. Evaluation of prostate cancer with PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2016; 57 (suppl 3):111S–116S.
Piert M, Montgomery J, Kunju LP, et al. 18F-choline PET/MRI: the additional value of PET for MRI-guided transrectal prostate biopsies. J Nucl Med 2016; 57:1065–1070.
Hovels AM, Heesakkers RA, 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; 63:387–395.
Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, et al. The diagnostic performance of MRI for detection of lymph node metastasis in bladder and prostate cancer: an updated systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210:W95–W109.
Hope TA, Goodman JZ, Allen IE, et al. Meta-analysis of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy for the detection of prostate cancer validated by histopathology. J Nucl Med 2019; 60:786–793.
Kim SJ, Lee SW, Ha HK. Diagnostic performance of radiolabeled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary lymph node staging in newly diagnosed intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Int 2019; 102:27–36.
Obek C, Doğanca T, Demirci E, et al. The accuracy of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary lymph node staging in high-risk prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44:1806–1812.
Thalgott M, Düwel C, Rauscher I, et al. One-stop shop whole-body (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI compared to clinical nomograms for preoperative T- and N-staging of high-risk prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2018; 59:1850–1856.
Van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, et al. Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int 2017; 119:209–215.
Von Eyben FE, Picchio M, Von Eyben R, et al. (68)Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography/computed tomography for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus 2018; 4:686–693.
Yaxley JW, Raveenthiran S, Nouhaud FX, et al. Outcomes of Primary lymph node staging of intermediate and high risk prostate cancer with (68)Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography/computerized tomography compared to histological correlation of pelvic lymph node pathology. J Urol 2019; 201:815–820.
Herlemann A, Wenter V, Kretschmer A, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography/computed tomography provides accurate staging of lymph node regions prior to lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2016; 70:553–557.
Ferraro DA, Muehlematter UJ, Garcia Schüler H, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET has the potential to improve patient selection for extended pelvic lymph node dissection in intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47:147–159.
Cantiello F, Gangemi V, Cascini GL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of (64)copper prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary lymph node staging of intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: our preliminary experience. Urology 2017; 106:139–145.
Budaus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Steuber T, et al. Initial experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2016; 69:393–396.
Rogasch JM, Cash H, Zschaeck S, et al. Ga-68-PSMA PET/CT in treatment-naive patients with prostate cancer: which clinical parameters and risk stratification systems best predict PSMA-positive metastases? Prostate 2018. [Epub ahead of print].
van Kalmthout LWM, van Melick HE, Lavalaye J, et al. Prospective validation of gallium-68 prostate specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography in primary staging of patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 2019; doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000531.
doi: 10.1097/ju.0000000000000531
Wu H, Xu T, Wang X, et al. Diagnostic performance of (6)(8)gallium labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for staging the prostate cancer with intermediate or high risk prior to radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Mens Health 2019. [Epub ahead of print].
Shetty D, Patel D, Le K, et al. Pitfalls in gallium-68 PSMA PET/CT interpretation: a pictorial review. Tomography 2018; 4:182–193.
Hofman MS, Hicks RJ, Maurer T, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET: clinical utility in prostate cancer, normal patterns, pearls, and pitfalls. Radiographics 2018; 38:200–217.
Giesel FL, Fiedler H, Stefanova M, 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; 42:1794–1800.
Vargas HA, Schor-Bardach R, Long N, et al. Prostate cancer bone metastases on staging prostate MRI: prevalence and clinical features associated with their diagnosis. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:271–277.
Briganti A, Passoni N, Ferrari M, et al. When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of the currently available guidelines and proposal of a novel risk stratification tool. Eur Urol 2010; 57:551–558.
Norgaard M, Jensen AØ, Jacobsen JB, et al. Skeletal related events, bone metastasis and survival of prostate cancer: a population based cohort study in Denmark (1999 to 2007). J Urol 2010; 184:162–167.
Dyrberg E, Hendel HW, Huynh THV, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-PET/CT in comparison with (18)F-fluoride-PET/CT and whole-body MRI for the detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study. Eur Radiol 2019; 29:1221–1230.
Lengana T, Lawal IO, Boshomane TG, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT replacing bone scan in the initial staging of skeletal metastasis in prostate cancer: a fait accompli? Clin Genitourin Cancer 2018; 16:392–401.
Pyka T, Okamoto S, Dahlbender M, et al. Comparison of bone scintigraphy and (68)Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43:2114–2121.
Hruby G, Eade T, Emmett L, et al. (68) Ga-PSMA-PET/CT staging prior to definitive radiation treatment for prostate cancer. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2018; 14:343–346.
Paschalis A, Sheehan B, Riisnaes R, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen heterogeneity and DNA repair defects in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2019; 76:469–478.
Giesel FL, Hadaschik B, Cardinale J, et al. F-18 labelled PSMA-1007: biodistribution, radiation dosimetry and histopathological validation of tumor lesions in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44:678–688.
Sterzing F, Kratochwil C, Fiedler H, 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; 43:34–41.
Koerber SA, Will L, Kratochwil C, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in primary and recurrent prostate carcinoma: implications for radiotherapeutic management in 121 patients. J Nucl Med 2018; [Epub ahead of print].
Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Eze C, Li M, et al. Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT on the radiotherapeutic approach to prostate cancer in comparison to CT: a retrospective analysis. J Nucl Med 2019; 60:963–970.
Calais J, et al. Potential impact of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT on prostate cancer definitive radiation therapy planning. J Nucl Med 2018.
Demirkol MO, Acar Ö, Uçar B, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen-based imaging in prostate cancer: impact on clinical decision making process. Prostate 2015; 75:748–757.
Dewes S, Schiller K, Sauter K, et al. Integration of (68)Ga-PSMA-PET imaging in planning of primary definitive radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a retrospective study. Radiat Oncol 2016; 11:73.
Roach PJ, Francis R, Emmett L, et al. The impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT on management intent in prostate cancer: results of an Australian prospective multicenter study. J Nucl Med 2018; 59:82–88.
Hofman MS, Murphy DG, Williams SG, et al. A prospective randomized multicentre study of the impact of gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT imaging for staging high-risk prostate cancer prior to curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA study): clinical trial protocol. BJU Int 2018; 122:783–793.