|
|
|
| Diagnostic value of 18F-prostate-specific membrane antigen-1007 PET/CT versus 18F-deoxyglucose PET/CT for bone metastasis in prostate cancer |
| DING Tingting, HAO Shanhu, WANG Zhiguo, ZHANG Wenwen, ZHANG Guoxu |
(Department of Nuclear Medicine, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang Liaoning 110016, China）
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective： To compare the diagnostic value of 18F-prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-1007-labeled positron emission tomography fusion computed tomography (PET/CT) and 18F-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT imaging for bone metastasis of prostate cancer. Methods： The clinical data of 30 prostate cancer patients admitted to the department of nuclear medicine of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command from December 2020 to December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, and all patients underwent 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT imaging and 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging test. The ROC curves were used to analyze the difference in diagnostic threshold and diagnostic efficacy of the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) for bone metastases between the two methods; the weighted Kappa test was used to analyze the agreement between the diagnostic results of the two physicians. Results： A total of 215 positive lesions were found in 30 patients, including 30 prostate cancer lesions and 185 bone metastases. The area under the ROC curve for SUVmax of prostate cancer lesions and bone metastases visualized by 18F-PSMA-1007 and 18FFDG PET/CT were 0.88, 0.96 and 0.81, 0.93, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of 18F-PSMA-1007 and 18F-FDG PET/CT in diagnosing prostate cancer bone metastases were 94.62%, 66.67%, 98.32%, 37.50%, 93.33% and 82.35%，50.00%，97.47%，10.81%，81.02%, respectively. The differences in sensitivity, negative predictive value, and diagnostic compliance between two methods were statistically significant (all P<0.05). Conclusion： 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT is a better diagnostic tool for primary prostate cancer bone metastasis, which is evidenced by that the sensitivity and accuracy of the diagnosis of prostate bone metastasis were higher than those of 18F-FDG PET/CT.
|
|
Received: 10 January 2023
|
|
|
|
［1］张骞，何阳. 2022美国泌尿外科学会年会前列腺癌研究进展［J］. 中华泌尿外科杂志， 2022， 12(7): 481-483.
［2］潘峰. 前列腺癌研究进展与展望报告发布［J］. 中国医药科学， 2022， 12(15): 1-4.
［3］林军明， 刘家明， 周扬. 前列腺癌骨转移的特点及其相关危险因素分析［J］. 解放军医学杂志， 2017, 42(8): 707-711.
［4］O′Keefe DS, Bacich DJ, Huang SS, et al.A perspective on the evolving story of PSMA biology, PSMAbased imaging, and endoradiotherapeutic strategies［J］. J Nucl Med， 2018, 59(7): 1007-1013.
［5］Kiess AP, Banerjee SR, Mease RC, et al. Prostatespecific membrane antigen as a target for cancer imaging and therapy［J］. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging， 2015, 59(3): 241-268.
［6］PanditTaskar N, O′Donoghue JA, Ruan S, et al. Firstinhuman imaging with 89ZrDfIAB2M antiPSMA minibody in patients with metastatic prostate cancer: pharmacokinetics, biodistribution, dosimetry, and lesion uptake［J］. J Nucl Med， 2016, 57(12): 1858-1864.
［7］AfsharOromieh A, Malcher A, Eder M, et al. PET imaging with a\[68Ga\]galliumlabelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: biodistribution in humans and first evaluation of tumour lesions［J］.Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging， 2013, 40(4): 486-495.
［8］de Galiza Barbosa F, Queiroz MA, Nunes RF, et al. Nonprostatic diseases on PSMA PET imaging: a spectrum of benign and malignant findings［J］. Cancer Imaging， 2020, 20(1): 23.
［9］Haffner MC, Kronberger IE, Ross JS, et al. Prostatespecific membrane antigen expression in the neovasculature of gastric and colorectal cancers［J］. Hum Pathol， 2009, 40(12): 1754-1761.
［10］Chang SS, Reuter VE, Heston WD, et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma neovasculature expresses prostatespecific membrane antigen［J］. Urology， 2001, 57(4): 801-805.
［11］王道英， 王治民， 庞燕， 等. 18FPSMA1007 PET/CT 与 18FFDG PET/CT 对前列腺癌诊断的初步对比研究［J］. 影像诊断与介入放射学， 2022, 31(2): 101-107.
［12］王淼， 董志坚. 18F前列腺特异性膜抗原PET/CT在前列腺癌筛查中的应用研究［J］. 中国肿瘤临床与康复， 2020, 27(12): 142-147.
［13］李曾， 廖洪， 毛顿， 等. 18FPSMA1007 PET/CT在初诊前列腺癌精准评估中的价值及对临床治疗决策的影响［J］. 中国癌症杂志， 2020, 30(3): 231-236.
［14］O′Keefe DS, Su SL, Bacich DJ, et al. Mapping, genomic organization and promoter analysis of the human prostatespecific membrane antigen gene［J］. Biochim Biophys Acta， 1998, 1443(1/2): 113-127.
［15］Kaittanis C, Andreou C, Hieronymus H, et al. Correction: Prostatespecific membrane antigen cleavage of vitamin B9 stimulates oncogenic signaling through metabotropic glutamate receptors［J］. J Exp Med， 2018, 215(1): 377.
［16］Hupe MC, Philippi C, Roth D, et al. Expression of prostatespecific membrane antigen (PSMA) on biopsies is an independent risk stratifier of prostate cancer patients at time of initial diagnosis［J］. Front Oncol， 2018, 8: 623.
［17］Ross JS, Sheehan CE, Fisher HA, et al. Correlation of primary tumor prostatespecific membrane antigen expression with disease recurrence in prostate cancer［J］. Clin Cancer Res， 2003, 9(17): 6357-6362.
［18］Perner S, Hofer MD, Kim R, et al. Prostatespecific membrane antigen expression as a predictor of prostate cancer progression［J］. Hum Pathol， 2007, 38(5): 696-701.
［19］蒋翠萍， 臧士明， 徐磊， 等.68GaPSMA11 PET/CT对未经治疗前列腺癌的临床决策的影响［J］. 临床泌尿外科杂志， 2018, 33(7): 551-555.
［20］Uprimny C, Kroiss AS, Decristoforo C, et al. 68GaPSMA11 PET/CT in primary staging of prostate cancer: PSA and Gleason score predict the intensity of tracer accumulation in the primary tumour［J］. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging， 2017, 44(6): 941-949.
［21］王一宁， 陈若华， 陈虞梅， 等. 68GaPSMA11 PET/CT与18FFDG PET/CT诊断前列腺癌生化复发的对比研究［J］. 中华核医学与分子影像杂志， 2020, 40(8): 470-474.
［22］Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAUEANMESTROESURSIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. part Ⅱ2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer［J］. Eur Urol， 2021, 79(2): 263-282.
［23］Tsechelidis I, Vrachimis A. PSMA PET in imaging prostate cancer［J］. Front Oncol， 2022, 12: 831429.
|
|
|
|
