Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (13)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (11)
- Preprint (2)
Language
- English (13) (remove)
Keywords
- prostate cancer (13) (remove)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin (13)
- Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik (8)
- Institut für diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie (Institut für Röntgendiagnostik) (2)
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II (2)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken (1)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie (1)
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 701983 (3)
Objectives: Recently, the standardized reporting and data system for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted positron emission tomography (PET) imaging studies, termed PSMA-RADS version 1.0, was introduced. We aimed to determine the interobserver agreement for applying PSMA-RADS to imaging interpretation of 18F-DCFPyL PET examinations in a prospective setting mimicking the typical clinical work-flow at a prostate cancer referral center.
Methods: Four readers (two experienced readers (ER, > 3 years of PSMA-targeted PET interpretation experience) and two inexperienced readers (IR, < 1 year of experience)), who had all read the initial publication on PSMA-RADS 1.0, assessed 50 18F-DCFPyL PET/computed tomography (CT) studies independently. Per scan, a maximum of 5 target lesions were selected by the observers and a PSMA-RADS score for every target lesion was recorded. No specific pre-existing conditions were placed on the selection of the target lesions, although PSMA-RADS 1.0 suggests that readers focus on the most highly avid or largest lesions. An overall scan impression based on PSMA-RADS was indicated and interobserver agreement rates on a target lesion-based, on an organ-based, and on an overall PSMA-RADS score-based level were computed.
Results: The number of target lesions identified by each observer were as follows: ER 1, 123; ER 2, 134; IR 1, 123; and IR 2, 120. Among those selected target lesions, 125 were chosen by at least two individual observers (all four readers selected the same target lesion in 58/125 (46.4%) instances, three readers in 40/125 (32%) and two observers in 27/125 (21.6%) instances). The interobserver agreement for PSMA-RADS scoring among identical target lesions was good (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for four, three and two identical target lesions, ≥0.60, respectively). For lymph nodes, an excellent interobserver agreement was derived (ICC=0.79). The interobserver agreement for an overall scan impression based on PSMA-RADS was also excellent (ICC=0.84), with a significant difference for ER (ICC=0.97) vs. IR (ICC=0.74, P=0.005).
Conclusions: PSMA-RADS demonstrates a high concordance rate in this study, even among readers with different levels of experience. This suggests that PSMA-RADS can be effectively used for communication with clinicians and can be implemented in the collection of data for large prospective trials.
Both prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)- and somatostatin receptor (SSTR)-targeted positron emission tomography (PET) imaging agents for staging and restaging of prostate carcinoma or neuroendocrine tumors, respectively, are seeing rapidly expanding use. In addition to diagnostic applications, both classes of radiotracers can be used to triage patients for theranostic endoradiotherapy. While interpreting PSMA- or SSTR-targeted PET/computed tomography (CT) scans, the reader has to be aware of certain pitfalls. Adding to the complexity of the interpretation of those imaging agents, both normal biodistribution, and also false-positive and -negative findings differ between PSMA- and SSTR-targeted PET radiotracers. Herein summarized under the umbrella term molecular imaging reporting and data systems (MI-RADS), two novel RADS classifications for PSMA- and SSTR-targeted PET imaging are described (PSMA- and SSTR-RADS). Both framework systems may contribute to increase the level of a reader’s confidence and to navigate the imaging interpreter through indeterminate lesions, so that appropriate workup for equivocal findings can be pursued. Notably, PSMA- and SSTR-RADS are structured in a reciprocal fashion, i.e. if the reader is familiar with one system, the other system can readily be applied as well. In the present review we will discuss the most common pitfalls on PSMA- and SSTR-targeted PET/CT, briefly introduce PSMA- and SSTR-RADS, and define a future role of the umbrella framework MI-RADS compared to other harmonization systems.
Background
Salvage radiotherapy (SRT) is clinically established in prostate cancer (PC) patients with PSA persistence or biochemical relapse (BCR) after prior radical surgery. PET/CT imaging prior to SRT may be performed to localize disease recurrence. The recently introduced \(^{68}\)Ga-PSMA outperforms other PET tracers for detection of recurrence and is therefore expected also to impact radiation planning.
Forty-five patients with PSA persistence (16 pts) or BCR (29 pts) after prior prostatectomy, scheduled to undergo SRT of the prostate bed, underwent \(^{68}\)Ga-PSMA PET/CT. The median PSA level was 0.67 ng/ml. The impact of \(^{68}\)Ga-PSMA PET/CT on the treatment decision was assessed. Patients with oligometastatic (≤5 lesions) PC underwent radiotherapy (RT), with the extent of the RT area and dose escalation being based on PET positivity.
Results
Suspicious lesions were detected in 24/45 (53.3 %) patients. In 62.5 % of patients, lesions were only detected by 68Ga-PSMA PET. Treatment was changed in 19/45 (42.2 %) patients, e.g., extending SRT to metastases (9/19), administering dose escalation in patients with morphological local recurrence (6/19), or replacing SRT by systemic therapy (2/19). 38/45 (84.4 %) followed the treatment recommendation, with data on clinical follow-up being available in 21 patients treated with SRT. All but one showed biochemical response (mean PSA decline 78 ± 19 %) within a mean follow-up of 8.12 ± 5.23 months.
Conclusions
\(^{68}\)Ga-PSMA PET/CT impacts treatment planning in more than 40 % of patients scheduled to undergo SRT. Future prospective studies are needed to confirm this significant therapeutic impact on patients prior to SRT.