Diagnostic value of ¹⁸F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT for predicting the pathological grade of prostate cancer

References

• Miller KD, Nogueira L, Devasia T, Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Jemal A, Kramer J, Siegel RL. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(5):409–10. doi:10.3322/caac.21731.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downes MR, Xu B, van der Kwast TH. Gleason grade patterns in nodal metastasis and corresponding prostatectomy specimens: impact on patient outcome. Histopathology. 2019;75(5):715–722. doi:10.1111/his.13938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seyrek N, Hollemans E, Osanto S, Pelger RCM, van der Poel HG, Bekers E, Bangma CH, Rietbergen J, Roobol MJ, Schoots IG, et al. Cribriform architecture outperforms Gleason pattern 4 percentage and tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in predicting the outcome of grade group 2 prostate cancer patients. Histopathology. 2022;80(3):558–565. doi:10.1111/his.14590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flood TA, Schieda N, Sim J, Breau RH, Morash C, Belanger EC, Robertson SJ. Evaluation of tumor morphologies and association with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy in grade group 5 prostate cancer. Virchows Arch. 2018;472(2):205–212. doi:10.1007/s00428-017-2241-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harding-Jackson N, Kryvenko ON, Whittington EE, Eastwood DC, Tjionas GA, Jorda M, Iczkowski KA. Outcome of Gleason 3 + 5 = 8 prostate cancer diagnosed on needle biopsy: prognostic Comparison with Gleason 4 + 4 = 8. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1076–1081. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.105.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Toby J, Eade T, Hruby G, Kneebone A, Aherne N, Brown C, Guo L, Hoffmann M, Shakespeare TP. Assessing ISUP prostate cancer grade groups in patients treated with definitive dose escalated external beam radiation. Radiother Oncol. 2021;162:91–97. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2021.06.025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang J, Yan H, Li J, Wang X, Chen H, Zheng X. Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2019;17(1):31. doi:10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hectors SJ, Cherny M, Yadav KK, Beksac AT, Thulasidass H, Lewis S, Davicioni E, Wang P, Tewari AK, Taouli B, et al. Radiomics features measured with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging predict prostate cancer aggressiveness. J Urol. 2019;202(3):498–505. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000272.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sun C, Chatterjee A, Yousuf A, Antic T, Eggener S, Karczmar GS, Oto A. Comparison of T2-weighted imaging, DWI, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for calculation of prostate cancer index lesion volume: correlation with Whole-Mount Pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(2):351–356. doi:10.2214/AJR.18.20147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschheidgen M, Schimmoller L, Arsov C, Ziayee F, Morawitz J, Valentin B, Radke KL, Giessing M, Esposito I, Albers P, et al. MRI grading for the prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness. Eur Radiol. 2022;32(4):2351–2359. doi:10.1007/s00330-021-08332-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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;3:81–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross JS, Sheehan CE, Fisher HA, Kaufman RP Jr., Kaur P, Gray K, Webb, I, Gray, G. S and Mosher R, Kallakury, BVS. Correlation of primary tumor prostate-specific membrane antigen expression with disease recurrence in prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:6357–6362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweat SD, Pacelli A, Murphy GP, Bostwick DG. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression is greatest in prostate adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases. Urology. 1998;52(4):637–640. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00278-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, Rutherford N, Martin JM, Frydenberg M, Shakher R, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395(10231):1208–1216. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, Bolton D, Lawrentschuk N. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive 68 Ga–prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70(6):926–937. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabasakal L, Demirci E, Ocak M, Akyel R, Nematyazar J, Aygun A, Halac M, Talat Z, Araman A. 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;36(6):582–587. doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000000290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donato P, Roberts MJ, Morton A, Kyle S, Coughlin G, Esler R, Dunglison N, Gardiner RA, Yaxley J. Improved specificity with 68Ga 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(1):20–30. doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4160-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aksu A, Karahan Sen NP, Tuna EB, Aslan G, Capa Kaya G. Evaluation of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT with volumetric parameters for staging of prostate cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun. 2021;42(5):503–509. doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000001370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acar E, Ozdogan O, Aksu A, Derebek E, Bekis R, Capa Kaya G. The use of molecular volumetric parameters for the evaluation of lu-177 PSMA I&T therapy response and survival. Ann Nucl Med. 2019;33(9):681–688. doi:10.1007/s12149-019-01376-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gafita A, Bieth M, Kronke M, Tetteh G, Navarro F, Wang H, Günther E, Menze B, Weber WA, Eiber M, et al. qPSMA: semiautomatic software for whole-body tumor burden assessment in prostate cancer using 68 Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(9):1277–1283. doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.224055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu H, Xu T, Wang X, Yu YB, Fan ZY, Li DX, Luo, L, Yang, XC, Jiao, W, Niu, HT. Diagnostic performance of (68)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. 2020;38:208–219.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sprute K, Kramer V, Koerber SA, Meneses M, Fernandez R, Soza-Ried C, Eiber M, Weber WA, Rauscher I, Rahbar K, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT imaging for lymph node staging of prostate carcinoma in primary and biochemical recurrence. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(2):208–213. doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.246363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zheng A, Li Y, Gao J, Dong W, Li Y, Duan X. The (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT performance on metastasis status and therapy assessment in oligo-metastasis prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12:935979. doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.935979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Grading Committee. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a New grading System. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(2):244–252. doi:10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu TC, Moretti K, Beckmann K, Cohen P, O’Callaghan M. ISUP group 4 – a homogenous group of prostate cancers? Pathol Oncol Res. 2018;24(4):921–925. doi:10.1007/s12253-017-0331-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tilki D, Wurnschimmel C, Preisser F, Graefen M, Huland H, Mandel P, Tennstedt P. The significance of primary biopsy Gleason 5 in patients with grade group 5 prostate cancer. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;6(2):255–258. doi:10.1016/j.euf.2020.01.008.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berger I, Annabattula C, Lewis J, Shetty DV, Kam J, Maclean F, Arianayagam M, Canagasingham B, Ferguson R, Khadra M, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT vs. mpMRI for locoregional prostate cancer staging: correlation with final histopathology. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018;21(2):204–211. doi:10.1038/s41391-018-0048-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zamboglou C, Schiller F, Fechter T, Wieser G, Jilg CA, Chirindel A, Salman N, Drendel V, Werner M, Mix M, et al. 68 Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA PET/CT versus histopathology in primary localized prostate cancer: a Voxel-Wise Comparison. Theranostics. 2016;6(10):1619–1628. doi:10.7150/thno.15344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardinale J, Martin R, Remde Y, Schafer M, Hienzsch A, Hubner S, Zerges AM, Marx H, Hesse R, Weber K, et al. Procedures for the GMP-Compliant production and quality control of [(18)F]PSMA-1007: a next generation radiofluorinated tracer for the detection of prostate cancer. Pharmaceutic (Basel). 2017;10(4):77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuten J, Fahoum I, Savin Z, Shamni O, Gitstein G, Hershkovitz D, Mabjeesh NJ, Yossepowitch O, Mishani E, Even-Sapir E, et al. Head-to-head Comparison of 68 Ga-PSMA-11 with 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in staging prostate cancer using histopathology and immunohistochemical analysis as a reference standard. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(4):527–532. doi:10.2967/jnumed.119.234187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giesel FL, Knorr K, Spohn F, Will L, Maurer T, Flechsig P, Neels O, Schiller K, Amaral H, Weber WA, et al. Detection efficacy of 18 F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in 251 patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(3):362–368. doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.212233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong JJ, Liu BL, Wang ZQ, Tang K, Ji XW, Yin WW, Lin J, Zheng X-W. The value of (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in identifying non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2020;10(1):138. doi:10.1186/s13550-020-00730-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karyagar SS, Karyagar S, Guven O. Correlations of the (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT derived primary prostate tumor PSMA expression parameters and metastatic patterns in patients with Gleason score >7 prostate cancer. Hell J Nucl Med. 2020;23:120–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidkonz C, Cordes M, Schmidt D, Bauerle T, Goetz TI, Beck M, Prante O, Cavallaro A, Uder M, Wullich B, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT-derived metabolic parameters for determination of whole-body tumor burden and treatment response in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(11):1862–1872. doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4042-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu C, Liu T, Zhang N, Liu Y, Li N, Du P, Yang Y, Liu M, Gong K, Yang X, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-617 PET/CT: a promising new technique for predicting risk stratification and metastatic risk of prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(11):1852–1861. doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4037-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmuck S, von Klot CA, Henkenberens C, Sohns JM, Christiansen H, Wester HJ, Ross TL, Bengel FM, Derlin T. Initial experience with volumetric 68 Ga-PSMA I&T PET/CT for assessment of whole-body tumor burden as a quantitative imaging biomarker in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(12):1962–1968. doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.193581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gundogan C, Ergul N, Cakir MS, Kilickesmez O, Gursu RU, Aksoy T, Çermik TF. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT Versus 18F-FDG PET/CT for Imaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2021;30(2):79–85. doi:10.4274/mirt.galenos.2021.92053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makino T, Miwa S, Koshida K. Impact of Gleason pattern 5 on outcomes of patients with prostate cancer and iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy. Prostate Int. 2016;4(4):152–155. doi:10.1016/j.prnil.2016.10.001.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Egevad L, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Samaratunga H. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading of prostate cancer – an ISUP consensus on contemporary grading. APMIS. 2016;124(6):433–435. doi:10.1111/apm.12533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar