Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Expression on PET/CT in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Letizia Calderoni, Elisa Maietti,Andrea Farolfi, Riccardo Mei, Karly S Louie, Michael Groaning,Stefano Fanti

Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine(2023)

引用 0|浏览3
暂无评分
摘要
Monitoring therapy response in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with novel hormonal therapies, taxanes, and newly approved therapies is crucial for optimizing treatment. [68Ga]Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) is a promising target for managing treatment in patients with prostate cancer. PSMA is overexpressed in patients with mCRPC; understanding how expression might change in patients undergoing treatment could determine its potential for guiding clinical decisions. We examined PSMA expression in patients with CRPC and compared PET/CT response with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) variation as a prognostic factor for progression-free survival and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively). Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective observational cohort study in patients with CRPC enrolled in the PSMA-PROSTATA registry study (EudraCT: 2015-004589-27). A first and second (if applicable) PSMA PET/CT were performed to determine PSMA expression (absence or presence). PET/CT response was assessed as responders (patients with stable disease, partial or complete response) versus nonresponders (patients with progressive disease) by comparing the first with the second PET/CT. PSA variation (increase or decrease from baseline) was assessed across the same time period. PFS was defined as the time between second PET/CT and PSA recurrence or evidence of radiologic progression. Results: Overall, 160 patients with CRPC were included in the analysis. At first PET/CT, nearly all (n = 152; 95.0%) patients had PSMA expression (classified as mCRPC), irrespective of prior systemic therapy. SUVmax was positively associated with baseline PSA levels and velocity (both P < 0.001). According to PET/CT response, median SUVmax on first PET/CT was numerically lower in nonresponders than in responders (17.5 vs. 20.4; P = 0.127). Similarly, patients with a PSA increase had significantly lower median SUVmax on first PET/CT (15.8) than did those with a PSA decrease (30.4; P = 0.018). PSA change was, on average, 146% in nonresponders and -57% in responders between first and second PET/CT (P < 0.001). Agreement between PET/CT and PSA response was 79% (k = 0.553, P < 0.001). Among the 63 patients included in PFS/OS analyses, 76.2% had a relapse and 36.5% died before 24-mo follow-up; median PFS and OS were 6.1 and 24 mo, respectively. PET/CT response, independent of PSA variation, was a significant prognostic factor for PFS. OS was not significantly different between PET/CT responders and nonresponders. Conclusion: PSMA PET/CT may be a useful imaging method predictive of treatment response in patients with mCRPC, regardless of ongoing systemic therapy. Data also suggest that response assessed by PET/CT is a potentially more significant prognostic factor than PSA for PFS. Further studies are needed to understand the potential involvement of PSMA expression on survival.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要