Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (6)
Document Type
- Journal article (6) (remove)
Language
- English (6)
Keywords
- PET (3)
- Positronen-Emissions-Tomografie (2)
- Prostate Cancer (2)
- positron emission tomography (2)
- prostate cancer (2)
- 18F-DCFPL (1)
- 18F-DCFPyL (1)
- Ganglia (1)
- Gleason score (1)
- Imaging pitfalls (1)
Institute
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
EU-Project number / Contract (GA) number
- 701983 (3)
Objective: Radiotracers targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) have increasingly been recognized as showing uptake in a number of normal structures, anatomic variants, and non-prostate-cancer pathologies. We aimed to explore the frequency and degree of uptake in peripheral ganglia in patients undergoing PET with the PSMA-targeted agent \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL.
Methods: A total of 98 patients who underwent \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging were retrospectively analyzed. This included 76 men with prostate cancer (PCa) and 22 patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC; 13 men, 9 women). Scans were evaluated for uptake in the cervical, stellate, celiac, lumbar and sacral ganglia. Maximum standardized uptake value corrected to body weight (SUV\(_{max}\)), and maximum standardized uptake value corrected to lean body mass (SUL\(_{max}\)) were recorded for all ganglia with visible uptake above background. Ganglia-to-background ratios were calculated by dividing the SUV\(_{max}\) and SUL\(_{max}\) values by the mean uptake in the ascending aorta (Aortamean) and the right gluteus muscle (Gluteusmean).
Results: Overall, 95 of 98 (96.9%) patients demonstrated uptake in at least one of the evaluated peripheral ganglia. With regard to the PCa cohort, the most frequent sites of radiotracer accumulation were lumbar ganglia (55/76, 72.4%), followed by the cervical ganglia (51/76, 67.1%). Bilateral uptake was found in the majority of cases [lumbar 44/55 (80%) and cervical 30/51 (58.8%)]. Additionally, discernible radiotracer uptake was recorded in 50/76 (65.8%) of the analyzed stellate ganglia and in 45/76 (59.2%) of the celiac ganglia, whereas only 5/76 (6.6%) of the sacral ganglia demonstrated \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL accumulation. Similar findings were observed for patients with RCC, with the most frequent locations of radiotracer uptake in both the lumbar (20/22, 90.9%) and cervical ganglia (19/ 22, 86.4%). No laterality preference was found in mean PSMA-ligand uptake for either the PCa or RCC cohorts.
Conclusion: As PSMA-targeted agents become more widely disseminated, the patterns of uptake in structures that are not directly relevant to patients’ cancers must be understood. This is the first systematic evaluation of the uptake of \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL in ganglia demonstrating a general trend with a descending frequency of radiotracer accumulation in lumbar, cervical, stellate, celiac, and sacral ganglia. The underlying biology that leads to variability of PSMA-targeted radiotracers in peripheral ganglia is not currently understood, but may provide opportunities for future research.
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.
The use of prostate-specific membrane antigen targeted PET imaging for the evaluation of prostate cancer has increased significantly in the last couple of decades. When evaluating these imaging findings based on the PSMA reporting and data system version 1.0, which categorize lesions based on their likelihood of prostate cancer involvement, PSMA-RADS-3A lesions are commonly seen, which are indeterminate for the presence of disease. A total of 28 patients with 171 PSMA-RADS-3A lesions on \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL PET/CT scans from June 2016 to May 2017 who had follow-up cross-sectional imaging over time were included in this study. The PSA levels of patients with PSMA-RADS-3A lesions were categorized into four groups, 0–0.2, 0.2–1, 1–2, and >2 ng/mL. The pre-operative Gleason score of these patients was categorized into two groups, Gleason score < 7 or ≥7. The median age for these patients was 72.5 years (range 59–81). The median PSA value for patients with positive lesions was significantly higher than those with negative lesions (5.8 ng/mL vs. 0.2 ng/mL, p < 0.0001). The lesion positivity rate was significantly higher in patients with PSA > 1 ng/mL (18.2% vs. 81.9%, p < 0.001). On ROC analysis, the highest classification accuracy was seen at PSA ≥ 0.6 ng/mL of 80.12% (95% CI = 73.69–86.16%), and the area under the curve was 71.32% (95% CI = 61.9–80.7%, p < 0.0001). A total of 96.4% (108/112) of patients with positive lesions and 86.4% (51/59) of patients with negative lesions had a PSMA-RADS-4/5 lymph node on the initial \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL PET/CT scan (p = 0.02). In patients with a Gleason score ≥ 7, the presence of positive PSMA-RADS-3A lesions was higher, compared to negative PSMA-RADS-3A lesions (p = 0.049). Higher PSA levels in patients with PSMA-RADS-3A lesions can point towards the presence of true positivity. PSA levels may be considered in deciding whether to call an indeterminate lesion on PSMA PET.
Purpose: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) is emerging as an important modality for imaging patients with prostate cancer (PCa). As with any imaging modality, indeterminate findings will arise. The PSMA reporting and data system (PSMA-RADS) version 1.0 codifies indeterminate soft tissue findings with the PSMA-RADS-3A moniker. We investigated the role of point-spread function (PSF) reconstructions on categorization of PSMA-RADS-3A lesions. Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of an institutional review board approved prospective trial. Around 60 min after the administration of 333 MBq (9 mCi) of PSMA-targeted \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL, patients underwent PET/computed tomography (CT) acquisitions from the mid-thighs to the skull vertex. The PET data were reconstructed with and without PSF. Scans were categorized according to PSMA-RADS version 1.0, and all PSMA-RADS-3A lesions on non-PSF images were re-evaluated to determine if any could be re-categorized as PSMA-RADS-4. The maximum standardized uptake values (SUVs) of the lesions, mean SUVs of blood pool, and the ratios of those values were determined. Results: A total of 171 PSMA-RADS-3A lesions were identified in 30 patients for whom both PSF reconstructions and cross-sectional imaging follow-up were available. A total of 13/171 (7.6%) were re-categorized as PSMA-RADS-4 lesions with PSF reconstructions. A total of 112/171 (65.5%) were found on follow-up to be true positive for PCa, with all 13 of the re-categorized lesions being true positive on follow-up. The lesions that were re-categorized trended towards having higher SUV\(_{max}\)-lesion and SUV\(_{max}\)-lesion/SUV\(_{mean}\)-blood-pool metrics, although these relationships were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The use of PSF reconstructions for \(^{18}\)F-DCFPyL PET can allow the appropriate re-categorization of a small number of indeterminate PSMA-RADS-3A soft tissue lesions as more definitive PSMA-RADS-4 lesions. The routine use of PSF reconstructions for PSMA-targeted PET may be of value at those sites that utilize this technology.