Diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography with 18F-PSMA-1007 for detecting local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy

In the situation of biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) it is important to distinguish between local recurrence in the prostate bed and systemic disease progression. Conventional imaging modalities have a limited role, especially in patients with low prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels. In recent years, the role of positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET/CT) with PSMA-labeled ligands has grown, but there is currently no consensus on the role and effectiveness of the method in detecting local recurrence of the disease. The aim of the study was to analyze the diagnostic performance of 18F-PSMA‐1007 PET/CT in detecting local recurrence of prostate cancer. The study included 57 patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy, who underwent PET/CT with 18F-PSMA-1007 and according to its results there were no distant and/or regional metastases. Local recurrence was clinically verified in 53 (93.0%) patients. The sensitivity of PET/CT in detecting local recurrence was 58.5 %, specificity ‒ 75.0, positive predictive value ‒ 96.9, negative predictive value ‒ 12.0 %. According to multivariate analysis, only PSA level was significantly associated with truepositive PET/CT findings (p = 0.02). According to multivariate analysis, PSA level is an independent predictive factor of 18F-PSMA‐1007 PET/CT sensitivity in detecting local recurrence (p  <  0.05). In the subgroup of patients with a low PSA level sensitivity was only 20.0  %. Therefore, a negative PET/CT scan at PSA level <0.5 ng/ml is not a reason for delay the initiation of salvage radiation therapy.

1. Partin A. W., Mangold L. A., Lamm D. M., Walsh P. C., Epstein J. I., Pearson J. D. Contemporary update of the prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin tables) for the new millennium. Urology, 2001, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 843–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01441-8

2. Partin A. W., Oesterling J. E. The clinical usefulness of prostate specific antigen: update 1994. Journal of Urology, 1994, vol. 152, no. 4, pp. 1358–1368. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32422-9

3. Roehl K. A., Han M., Ramos C. G., Antenor J. A. V., Catalona W. J. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. Journal of Urology, 2004, vol. 172, no. 3, pp. 910–914. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000134888.22332.bb

4. Mitchell C. R., Boorjian S. A., Umbreit E. C., Rangel L. J., Carlson R. E., Karnes R. J. 20-Year survival after radical prostatectomy as initial treatment for cT3 prostate cancer. BJU International, 2012, vol. 110, no. 11, pp. 1709–1713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11372.x

5. Ward J. F., Blute M. L., Slezak J., Bergstralh E. J., Zincke H. The long-term clinical impact of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer 5 or more years after radical prostatectomy. Journal of Urology, 2003, vol. 170, no. 5, pp. 1872‒1876. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000091876.13656.2e

6. Cornford P., Bellmunt J., Bolla M., Briers E., de Santis M., Gross T. [et al.]. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. European Urology, 2017, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 631–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.002

7. Sanchez-Crespo A. Comparison of gallium-68 and fluorine-18 imaging characteristics in positron emission tomography. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 2013, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2012.06.034

8. Gorin M. A., Pomper M. G., Rowe S. P. PSMA-targeted imaging of prostate cancer: the best is yet to come. BJU International, 2016, vol. 117, no. 5, pp. 715‒716. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13435

9. Kesch C., Vinsensia M., Radtke J. P., Schlemmer H. P., Heller M., Ellert E. [et al.]. Intraindividual comparison of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, multiparametric MRI, and radical prostatectomy specimens in patients with primary prostate cancer: a retrospective, proof-of-concept study. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 2017, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 1805–1810. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.189233

10. Giesel F. L., Knorr K., Spohn F., Will L., Maurer T., Flechsig P. [et al.]. Detection efficacy of [18F]PSMA‐1007 PET/ CT in 251 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 2019, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 362‒368. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.212233

11. Bidakhvidi N. A., Laenen A., Jentjens S., Deroose C. M., van Laere K., de Wever L. [et al.]. Parameters predicting [18F]PSMA-1007 scan positivity and type and number of detected lesions in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. EJNMMI Research, 2021, vol. 11, no. 1, art. 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-021-00783-w

12. von Eyben F. E., Picchio M., von Eyben R., Rhee H., Bauman G. 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography/computed tomography for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Urology Focus, 2018, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 686–693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.002

13. Briganti A., Karnes R.J.,Joniau S., Boorjian S. A., Cozzarini C., Gandaglia G. [et al.]. Prediction of outcome following early salvage radiotherapy among patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. European Urology, 2014, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.045

14. Fossati N., Karnes R. J., Cozzarini C., Fiorino C., Gandaglia G., Joniau S. [et al.]. Assessing the optimal timing for early salvage radiation therapy in patients with prostate-specific antigen rise after radical prostatectomy. European Urology, 2016, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 728–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.009

15. Song W., Jeon H. G., Sung H. H., Jeong B. J., Seo S. I., Jeon S. S., Choi H. Y., Lee H. M. Prognostic factors after salvage radiotherapy alone in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. International Journal of Urology, 2016, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.12960

16. Leventis A. K., Shariat S. F., Slawin K. M. Local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: correlation of US features with prostatic fossa biopsy findings.Radiology, 2001, vol. 219, no. 2, pp. 432‒439. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma20432