Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Die Rolle des PSMA-PET/CT bei Patienten mit metastasiertem Prostatakarzinom

The role of PSMA PET-CT in patients with metastatic prostate cancer

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die PSMA-PET/CT-Bildgebung ist zur Lokalisation des Prostatakarzinoms (PCa) in Deutschland zunehmend verfügbar. Die Vor- und Nachteile in den verschiedenen Krankheitsstadien werden evaluiert. Da die klinische Relevanz des Nachweises einer Oligometastasierung in der Primärdiagnostik bisher nicht ausreichend beurteilt werden kann, sollte die Bildgebung nur in klinischen Studien erfolgen. In der Rezidivdiagnostik nach einer Therapie mit kurativer Intention besitzt die PSMA-PET/CT-Bildgebung wertvolles Potential für die Planung einer möglichen Salvagetherapie. Für die Nutzung der PSMA-PET/CT-Bildgebung im metastasierten kastrationsresistenten PCa gibt es aktuell keine Evidenz.

Abstract

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging for the localization of prostate cancer is increasingly available in Germany. The advances and limitations in different disease stages are reviewed. As the clinical relevance of oligometastatic disease in primary cancer detected by PSMA PET-CT imaging is not yet completely understood, it should only be used in clinical trials. In recurrent prostate cancer after therapy with curative intent, PSMA PET-CT shows encouraging potential for the planning of salvage therapy. In metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer evidence for its use is not available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL et al (2015) The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the 68 Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:197–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2949-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Attenberger U, Ritter M, Wenz F (Hrsg) (2017) MR- und PET-Bildgebung der Prostata – Diagnostik und Therapieplanung. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, New York https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-50468-0

    Google Scholar 

  3. Balogh EP, Ganz PA, Murphy SB et al (2011) Patient-centered cancer treatment planning: improving the quality of oncology care. Summary of an Institute of Medicine workshop. Oncologist 16:1800–1805. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0252

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bräuer A, Rahbar K, Konnert J et al (2017) Diagnostic value of additional 68 Ga-PSMA-PET before 223 Ra-dichloride therapy in patients with metastatic prostate carcinoma. Nuklearmedizin 56:14–22. https://doi.org/10.3413/Nukmed-0846-16-09

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Budäus L, Leyh-Bannurah S‑R, Salomon G et al (2016) Initial experience of 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 69:393–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Conway RE, Petrovic N, Li Z et al (2006) Prostate-specific membrane antigen regulates angiogenesis by modulating integrin signal transduction. Mol Cell Biol 26:5310–5324. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00084-06

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M et al (2015) Evaluation of hybrid 68 Ga-PSMA Ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med 56:668–674. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.154153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K et al (2016) Simultaneous 68 Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol 70:829–836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fanti S, Minozzi S, Castellucci P et al (2016) PET/CT with 11 C-choline for evaluation of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: meta-analysis and critical review of available data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:55–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3202-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fendler WP, Calais J, Allen-Auerbach M et al (2017) 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT interobserver agreement for prostate cancer assessments: an international multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med 190827:117. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.190827

    Google Scholar 

  11. Franz T, von Hardenberg J, Blana A et al (2016) MRT/TRUS-fusionierte Biopsiesysteme. Urologe. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-016-0268-1

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gillessen S, Attard G, Beer TM et al (2017) Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: the report of the advanced prostate cancer consensus conference APCCC 2017. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.002

    Google Scholar 

  13. Herlemann A, Wenter V, Kretschmer A et al (2016) 68Ga-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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.051

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hope TA, Truillet C, Ehman EC et al (2017) 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging of response to androgen receptor inhibition: first human experience. J Nucl Med 58:81–84. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.181800

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Hövels AM, Heesakkers RAM, Adang EM et al (2008) The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 63:387–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2007.05.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. James N, Graham J, Maurer T et al (2017) Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: what Americans can learn from international oncologists. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 37:344–357. https://doi.org/10.14694/EDBK_175496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kesch C, Vinsensia M, Radtke JP et al (2017) Intra-individual comparison of 18 F‑PSMA-1007-PET/CT, multi-parametric MRI and radical prostatectomy specimen in patients with primary prostate cancer – a retrospective, proof of concept study. J Nucl Med 189233:116. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.189233

    Google Scholar 

  18. Krohn T, Verburg FA, Pufe T et al (2015) [68Ga]PSMA-HBED uptake mimicking lymph node metastasis in coeliac ganglia: an important pitfall in clinical practice. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:210–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2915-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B et al (2017) Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int 119:209–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lindenberg ML, Turkbey B, Mena E, Choyke PL (2017) Imaging locally advanced, recurrent, and metastatic prostate cancer. JAMA Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.5840

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I et al (2015) Diagnostic efficacy of (68)Gallium-PSMA-PET compared to conventional imaging in lymph node staging of of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.025

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Messiou C, Cook G, Reid AH et al (2011) The CT flare response of metastatic bone disease in prostate cancer. Acta Radiol 52:557–561. https://doi.org/10.1258/ar.2011.100342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Murphy DG, Sweeney CJ, Tombal B (2017) „Gotta catch ’em all“, or do we? Pokemet approach to metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 72:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Osman MM, Iravani A, Hofman MS, Hicks RJ (2017) Detection of synchronous primary malignancies with 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer: frequency in 764 patients. J Nucl Med 190215:117. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.190215

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pandit-Taskar N, Veach DR, Fox JJ et al (2016) Evaluation of castration-resistant prostate cancer with androgen receptor-axis imaging. J Nucl Med 57:73S–78S. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.170134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D et al (2016) 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 70:926–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R et al (2011) The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 60:291–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pyka T, Okamoto S, Dahlbender M et al (2016) Comparison of bone scintigraphy and 68 Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:2114–2121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3435-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rauscher I, Maurer T, Beer AJ et al (2016) Value of 68 Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET for the assessment of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: comparison with histopathology after salvage lymphadenectomy. J Nucl Med 57:1713–1719. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.173492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ryan CJ, Shah S, Efstathiou E et al (2011) Phase II study of abiraterone acetate in chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer displaying bone flare discordant with serologic response. Clin Cancer Res 17:4854–4861. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0815

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Scher HI, Morris MJ, Basch E, Heller G (2011) End points and outcomes in castration-resistant prostate cancer: from clinical trials to clinical practice. J Clin Oncol 29:3695–3704. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.35.8648

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Schwarzenböck SM, Eiber M, Kundt G et al (2016) Prospective evaluation of [(11)C]Choline PET/CT in therapy response assessment of standardized docetaxel first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced castration refractory prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:2105–2113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3439-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shakespeare TP (2015) Effect of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography on the decision-making of radiation oncologists. Radiat Oncol 10:233. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0548-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Shen G, Deng H, Hu S, Jia Z (2014) Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol 43:1503–1513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-1903-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Shikanov S, Kocherginsky M, Shalhav AL, Eggener SE (2012) Cause-specific mortality following radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 15:106–110. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2011.55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tosoian JJ, Gorin MA, Ross AE et al (2016) Oligometastatic prostate cancer: definitions, clinical outcomes, and treatment considerations. Nat Rev Urol 14:15–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2016.175

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Tosoian JJ, Gorin MA, Rowe SP et al (2017) Correlation of PSMA-targeted 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT findings with immunohistochemical and genomic data in a patient with metastatic neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 15:e65–e68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2016.09.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Umbehr MH, Müntener M, Hany T et al (2013) The role of 11 C-Choline and 18 F-Fluorocholine positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 64:106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Usmani S, Ahmed N, Marafi F et al (2017) Molecular imaging in neuroendocrine differentiation of prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med 42:410–413. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Wallis CJD, Cheung P, Herschorn S et al (2015) Complications following surgery with or without radiotherapy or radiotherapy alone for prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 112:977–982. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1–3, 68167, Mannheim, Deutschland

    J. von Hardenberg, P. Nuhn & M. Ritter

  2. Institut für Klinische Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin der Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Deutschland

    K.-A. Büsing

Authors
  1. J. von Hardenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K.-A. Büsing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Nuhn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Ritter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. von Hardenberg.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

J. von Hardenberg, K.-A. Büsing, P. Nuhn und M. Ritter geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Additional information

Dieser Beitrag erschien ursprünglich in der Zeitschrift Der Urologe 2017, 56:1410–1416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-017-0513-2.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

von Hardenberg, J., Büsing, KA., Nuhn, P. et al. Die Rolle des PSMA-PET/CT bei Patienten mit metastasiertem Prostatakarzinom. Radiologe 58, 226–232 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-018-0358-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-018-0358-8

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation