Download PDF
Radiopraxis 2019; 12(01): E1-E14
DOI: 10.1055/a-0746-6458
CPD-Fortbildung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Aktueller Stand der PSMA-PET-Diagnostik beim Prostatakarzinom

Fabian Spohn
Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Jan Philipp Radtke
Abteilung für Urologie, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Charlotte Düwel
Klinik für Urologie, Technische Universität München
,
Matthias Eiber
Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin, Technische Universität München
,
Stefan Körber
Abteilung für Radioonkologie, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Claudia Gasch
Abteilung für Urologie, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Clemens Kratochwil
Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Uwe Haberkorn
KKE Nuklearmedizin, DKFZ, Heidelberg
,
Markus Hohenfellner
Abteilung für Urologie, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Jürgen Debus
Abteilung für Radioonkologie, UK-HD, Heidelberg
,
Frederik L. Giesel
Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin, UK-HD, Heidelberg
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 February 2019 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Dieser Artikel gibt ein Update zum aktuellen Stand der PSMA-PET-Diagnostik beim Prostatakarzinom. Dabei soll auf die Schwerpunkte des Primärstagings und der Diagnostik beim biochemischen Rezidiv eingegangen sowie Aspekte aus uroonkologischer und strahlentherapeutischer Sicht miteinbezogen werden. Durch die andauernde Weiterentwicklung und Optimierung der PSMA-gerichteten Tracer bekommt die molekulare Bildgebung mittels PET / CT einen immer höheren Stellenwert in dem Patientenmanagement, was sich auch in der expliziten Erwähnung aktuellster nationaler sowie internationaler Leitlinien widerspiegelt.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67: 7-30
    CrossrefPubMed
  • 2 Schoder H. 2-[18F]Fluoro-2-Deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the detection of disease in patients with prostatespecific antigen relapse after radical prostatectomy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 4761-4769
    CrossrefPubMed
  • 3 Evangelista L, Guttilla A, Zattoni F. et al. Utility of choline positron emission tomography / computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 1040-1048
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Fanti S, Minozzi S, Castellucci P. et al. 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 2016; 43: 55-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung. Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms Im Internet: http://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/043-022OLk_S3_Prostatakarzinom_2016-12.pdf
  • 6 Chang SS. Overview of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Rev Urol 2004; 6 (Suppl. 10 ): S13-S18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bostwick DG, Pacelli A, Blute M. et al. Prostate specific membrane antigen expression in prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma: A study of 184 cases. Cancer 1998; 82: 2256-2261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR. et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3: 81-85
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Budaus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G. et al. Initial Experience of (68)Ga‐PSMA PET / CT Imaging in High‐risk Prostate Cancer Patients Prior to Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 393-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I. et al. Diagnostic Efficacy of (68)Gallium‐PSMA Positron Emission Tomography Compared to Conventional Imaging for Lymph Node Staging of 130 Consecutive Patients with Intermediate to High Risk Prostate Cancer. J Urol 2016; 195: 1436-1443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rowe SP, Gorin MA, Allaf ME. et al. PET imaging of prostatespecific membrane antigen in prostate cancer: current state of the art and future challenges. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2016; 19: 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kesch C, Kratochwil C, Mier W. et al. Ga-68 or F-18 for Prostate Cancer Imaging? J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 687-688
    CrossrefPubMed
  • 13 Rahbar K, Weckesser M, Ahmadzadehfar H. et al. Advantage of F-PSMA-1007 over Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging for differentiation of local recurrence vs. urinary tracer excretion. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018 doi:10.1007/s00259-018-3952-0
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Dietlein M, Kobe C, Kuhnert G. et al. Comparison of [(18)F] DCFPyL and [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET Imaging in Patients with Relapsed Prostate Cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2015; 17: 575-584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Giesel F, Will L, Lawal I. et al. Intra-individual comparison of FPSMA-1007 and F-DCFPyL PET / CT in the prospective evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed prostate carcinoma: A pilot study. J Nucl Med 2017 doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.204669
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Steiger P, Thoeny HC. Prostate MRI based on PI-RADS version 2: how we review and report. Cancer Imaging 2016; 16: 9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hamoen EHJ, De rooij M, Witjes JA. et al. Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for Prostate Cancer Detection with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 1112-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ruprecht O, Weisser P, Bodelle B. et al. MRI of the prostate: interobserver agreement compared with histopathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 456-460
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 De rooij M, Hamoen EH, Fütterer JJ. et al. Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202: 343-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K. et al. Simultaneous (68)Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET / MRI Improves the Localization of Primary Prostate Cancer. Eur Uro 2016 doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053
    PubMed
  • 21 Koerber SA, Utzinger MT, Kratochwil C. et al. Ga-PSMA-11 PET / CT in Newly Diagnosed Carcinoma of the Prostate: Correlation of Intraprostatic PSMA Uptake with Several Clinical Parameters. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 1943-1948
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kesch C, Vinsensia M, Radtke JP. et al. Intraindividual Comparison of F-PSMA-1007 PET / CT, Multiparametric MRI, and Radical Prostatectomy Specimens in Patients with Primary Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective, Proof-of-Concept Study. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 1805-1810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Budäus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G. et al. Initial Experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET / CT Imaging in High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Prior to Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 393-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cornford P, Bellmunt J, Bolla M. et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: Treatment of Relapsing, Metastatic, and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2017; 71: 630-642
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Heidenreich A, Pfister D, Merseburger A. et al. Castrationresistant prostate cancer: where we stand in 2013 and what urologists should know. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 260-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL. et al. 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 2015; 42: 197-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M. et al. Evaluation of Hybrid 68Ga-PSMA Ligand PET / CT in 248 Patients with Biochemical Recurrence After Radical Prostatectomy. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 668-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dietlein F, Kobe C, Neubauer S. et al. PSA-Stratified Performance of F- and Ga-PSMA PET in Patients with Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 947-952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Afshar-Oromieh A, Holland-Letz T, Giesel FL. et al. Diagnostic performance of Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) PET / CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: evaluation in 1007 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44: 1258-1268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D. et al. 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: 926-937
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Rauscher I, Düwel C, Haller B. et al. Efficacy, Predictive Factors, and Prediction Nomograms for Ga-labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-ligand Positron-emission Tomography / Computed Tomography in Early Biochemical Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2018 doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.01.006
    PubMed
  • 32 Giesel FL, Will L, Kesch C. et al. Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer: Initial Results with [F]PSMA-1007 PET / CT. J Nucl Med 2018; 59: 632-635
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Giesel FL, Knorr K, Spohn F. et al. [18F]PSMA-1007 PET / CT in 166 Patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy, SNMMIA-2839-2018. 2018
    PubMed
  • 34 Rahbar K, Ahmadzadehfar H, Kratochwil C. et al. German Multicenter Study Investigating 177Lu-PSMA-617 Radioligand Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 85-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Kratochwil C, Bruchertseifer F, Giesel FL. et al. 225Ac-PSMA-617 for PSMA-Targeted α-Radiation Therapy of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med 2016; 57: 1941-1944
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Abdollah F, Sood A, Sammon JD. et al. Long-term Cancer Control Outcomes in Patients with Clinically High-risk Prostate Cancer Treated with Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results from a Multi-institutional Study of 1100 Patients. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 497-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N. et al. More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 212-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Moschini M, Carroll PR, Eggener SE. et al. Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Identification, Management, and Outcomes. Eur Urol 2017 doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.009
    PubMed
  • 39 Sooriakumaran P, Karnes J, Stief C. et al. A Multi-institutional Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes in 106 Men Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy for Distant Metastatic Prostate Cancer at Presentation. Eur Urol 2015; 69: 788-794
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Hovels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM. et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 387-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P. et al. 11C-Choline Positron Emission Tomography / Computerized Tomography for Preoperative Lymph-Node Staging in Intermediate-Risk and High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Clinical Staging Nomograms. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 392-401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Heck MM, Souvatzoglou M, Retz M. et al. Prospective comparison of computed tomography, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and [(11)C]choline positron emission tomography / computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41: 694-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Heidenreich A, Ohlmann CH, Polyakov S. Anatomical Extent of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 29-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Giesel FL, Fiedler H, Stefanova M. et al. PSMA PET / CT with Glu-urea-Lys-(Ahx)-[68Ga(HBED-CC)] versus 3 D CT volumetric lymph node assessment in recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 1794-1800
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Brogsitter C, Zöphel K, Kotzerke J. 18F-Choline, 11C-choline and 11C-acetate PET / CT: Comparative analysis for imaging prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40: 18-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Herlemann A, Wenter V, Kretschmer A. et al. 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 2016: 1-5
    PubMed
  • 47 Vinsensia M, Chyoke P, Hadaschik B. et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT and volumetric morphology of PET-positive lymph nodes stratified by tumor differentiation of prostate cancer. JNM 2017 doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.185033
    PubMed
  • 48 Zamboglou C, Wieser G, Hennies S. et al. MRI versus 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT for gross tumour volume delineation in radiation treatment planning of primary prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 889-897
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Zamboglou C, Drendel V, Jilg CA. et al. Comparison of 68Ga-HBED-CC PSMA-PET / CT and multiparametric MRI for gross tumour volume detection in patients with primary prostate cancer based on slice by slice comparison with histopathology. Theranostics 2017; 7: 228-237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B. et al. Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography / computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int 2017; 119: 209-215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Uprimny C, Kroiss AS, Fritz J. et al. Early PET imaging with [68]Ga-PSMA-11 increases the detection rate of local recurrence in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44: 1647-1655
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Afshar-Oromieh A. et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy is at risk to be missed in 68 Ga-PSMA-11-PET of PET / CT and PET / MRI: comparison with mpMRI integrated in simultaneous PET / MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016 doi:10.1007/s00259-016-3594-z
    PubMed
  • 53 Giesel FL, Hadaschik B, Cardinale J. et al. F-18 labelled PSMA-1007: biodistribution, radiation dosimetry and histopathological validation of tumor lesions in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016 DOI: doi:10.1007/s00259-016-3573-4
    Crossref
  • 54 Mohler JL, Kantoff PW, Armstrong AJ. et al. Prostate Cancer, Version 1. 2016 Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2016; 14: 19-30
    Google Scholar
  • 55 Rauscher I, Maurer T, Beer AJ. et al. Value of 68Ga-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 2016; 57: 1713-1719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Jilg CA, Rischke HC, Reske SN. et al. Salvage lymph node dissection with adjuvant radiotherapy for nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. J Urol 2012; 188: 2190-2197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A. et al. Long-term Outcomes of Salvage Lymph Node Dissection for Clinically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Results of a Single-institution Series with a Minimum Follow-up of 5 Years. Eur Urol 2014; 67: 299-309
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Abdollah F, Briganti A, Montorsi F. et al. Contemporary role of salvage lymphadenectomy in patients with recurrence following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 839-849
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Jilg CA, Drendel V, Rischke HC. et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Ga-68-HBED-CC-PSMA-ligand-PET / CT Before Salvage Lymph Node Dissection for Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Theranostics 2017; 7: 1770-1780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Maurer T, Weirich G, Schottelius M. et al. Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen – radioguided Surgery for Metastatic Lymph Nodes in Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 530-534
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Rauscher I, Düwel C, Wirtz M. et al. Value of (111) In-PSMAradioguided surgery for salvage lymphadenectomy in recurrent prostate cancer: correlation with histopathology and clinical follow-up. BJU Int 2016 doi:10.1111/bju.13713
    PubMed
  • 62 Robu S, Schottelius M, Eiber M. et al. Preclinical evaluation and first patient application of 99mTc-PSMA-I&S for SPECT imaging and radioguided surgery in prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2016 ; 00: 00-00 #((Band, Seiten?))
    PubMed
  • 63 Rowe S, Pienta K, Pomper MG. et al. Proposal of a Structured Reporting System for Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-Targeted PET Imaging: PSMA-RADS Version 1.0. J Nucl Med 2017 doi:jnumed.117.195255
    PubMed
  • 64 Rowe SP, Pienta KJ, Pomper MG. et al. PSMA-RADS Version 1.0: A Step Towards Standardizing the Interpretation and Reporting of PSMA – targeted PET Imaging Studies. Eur Urol 2018; 73: 485-487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Fanti S, Minozzi S, Morigi JJ. et al. Development of standardized image interpretation for 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT to detect prostate cancer recurrent lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017 : 1-14
    PubMed
  • 66 Gupta SK, Watson T, Denham J. et al. Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography for Prostate Cancer: Distribution of Disease and Implications for Radiation Therapy Planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 99: 701-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Habl G, Sauter K, Schiller K. et al. (68) Ga-PSMA-PET for radiation treatment planning in prostate cancer recurrences after surgery: Individualized medicine or new standard in salvage treatment. Prostate 2017; 77: 920-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Fendler WP, Buchner A. et al. Detection level and pattern of positive lesions using PSMA PET / CT for staging prior to radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol 2017; 12: 176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Ost P, Reynders D, Decaestecker K. et al. Surveillance or Metastasis-Directed Therapy for Oligometastatic Prostate Cancer Recurrence: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Trial. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36: 446-453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Schiller K, Devecka M, Maurer T. et al. Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA-PET imaging on target volume definition and guidelines in radiation oncology – a patterns of failure analysis in patients with primary diagnosis of prostate cancer. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13: 36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Dewes S, Schiller K, Sauter K. et al. Integration of (68)Ga-PSMA-PET imaging in planning of primary definitive radiotherapy in prostate cancer: a retrospective study. Radiat Oncol 2016; 11: 73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Roach PJ, Francis R, Emmett L. et al. The Impact of 68Ga-PSMA PET / CT on Management Intent in Prostate Cancer: Results of an Australian Prospective Multicenter Study. J Nucl Med 2018; 59: 82-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Stish BJ, Pisansky TM, Harmsen WS. et al. Improved Metastasis-Free and Survival Outcomes With Early Salvage Radiotherapy in Men With Detectable Prostate-Specific Antigen After Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 3864-3871
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar