The value of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in preoperative evaluation of prostate cancer within PSA gray area

18F-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-1007 positron emission tomogra-phy/computed tomograpy (PET/CT) had been increasingly significant in detecting prostate cancer. This study was aimed to assess the usefulness of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT in preoperative evaluation of prostate cancer for the cases with serum total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) levels between 4 and 10 ng/mL, referred as the PSA gray area. A total of 117 prostate cancer patients in PSA gray area were retrospectively analyzed in the period between March 2019 and December 2022. The independent predictors of extraprostatic extension (EPE) were identified via the Univariate and multivariate analyses. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was the only independent predictor of EPE (odds ratio (OR), 1.114; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.040–1.194; p = 0.002). The predicted model’s area under receiver-operating characteristic curves was 75.4%. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT were calculated for diagnosing the regional lymph node and bone metastases, and obtained as 85.71%, 99.20%, 99.05% and 100%, 97.35%, 99.15%, respectively. In conclusion, SUVmax as compared to the clinical parameters had higher predictive value for EPE in prostate cancer patients within PSA gray area. 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT had thus the satisfactory evaluation efficacy for diagnosing the regional lymph node and bone metastases.

Prostate cancer; Positron emission tomography; 18F-prostate-specific membrane antigen; Prostate-specific antigen gray area; Stage

[1] Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2018; 68: 394–424.

[2] Chen W. Cancer statistics: updated cancer burden in China. Chinese Journal of Cancer Research. 2015; 27: 1.

[3] Chen M, Ma T, Li J, Zhang HJ, Li Q, Wang JJ, et al. Diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in the gray area: construction of 2 predictive models. Medical Science Monitor. 2021; 27: e929913.

[4] Gentile F, La Civita E, Della Ventura B, Ferro M, Cennamo M, Bruzzese D, et al. A combinatorial neural network analysis reveals a synergistic behaviour of multiparametric magnetic resonance and prostate health index in the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer. 2022; 20: e406–e410.

[5] Gentile F, La Civita E, Ventura BD, Ferro M, Bruzzese D, Crocetto F, et al. A neural network model combining [−2] proPSA, freePSA, total PSA, cathepsin D, and thrombospondin-1 showed increased accuracy in the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer. Cancers. 2023; 15: 1355.

[6] Aminsharifi A, Howard L, Wu Y, De Hoedt A, Bailey C, Freedland SJ, et al. Prostate specific antigen density as a predictor of clinically significant prostate cancer when the prostate specific antigen is in the diagnostic gray zone: defining the optimum cutoff point stratified by race and body mass index. Journal of Urology. 2018; 200: 758–766.

[7] Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. European Urology. 2021; 79: 243–262.

[8] Donato P, Roberts M, Morton A, Kyle S, Coughlin G, Esler R, et al. Improved specificity with Ga PSMA PET/CT to detect clinically significant lesions “invisible” on multiparametric MRI of the prostate: a single institution comparative analysis with radical prostatectomy histology. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2019; 46: 20–30.

[9] de Feria Cardet RE, Hofman MS, Segard T, Yim J, Williams S, Francis RJ, et al. Is prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging cost-effective in prostate cancer: an analysis informed by the proPSMA trial. European Urology. 2021; 79: 413–418.

[10] Li Y, Han D, Wu P, Ren J, Ma S, Zhang J, et al. Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-617 PET/CT with mpMRI for the detection of PCa in patients with a PSA level of 4–20 ng/mL before the initial biopsy. Scientific Reports. 2020; 10: 10963.

[11] Jochumsen MR, Bouchelouche K. PSMA PET/CT for primary staging of prostate cancer—an updated overview. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. 2024; 54: 39–45.

[12] Ruigrok EAM, van Weerden WM, Nonnekens J, de Jong M. The future of PSMA-targeted radionuclide therapy: an overview of recent preclinical research. Pharmaceutics. 2019; 11: 560.

[13] Woo S, Ghafoor S, Becker AS, Han S, Wibmer AG, Hricak H, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) for local staging of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Hybrid Imaging. 2020; 4: 16.

[14] Ingvar J, Hvittfeldt E, Trägårdh E, Simoulis A, Bjartell A. Assessing the accuracy of [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT for primary staging of lymph node metastases in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients. EJNMMI Research. 2022; 12: 48.

[15] Ceci F, Oprea-Lager DE, Emmett L, Adam JA, Bomanji J, Czernin J, et al. E-PSMA: the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2021; 48: 1626–1638.

[16] Fanti S, Goffin K, Hadaschik BA, Herrmann K, Maurer T, MacLennan S et al. Consensus statements on PSMA PET/CT response assessment criteria in prostate cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2021; 48: 469–476.

[17] van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, Delprado W, Ting F, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU International. 2017; 119: 209–215.

[18] Marin L, Ezziane M, Comperat E, Mozer P, Cancel-Tassin G, Coté JF, et al. Comparison of semi-automated and manual methods to measure the volume of prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging. Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging. 2017; 98: 423–428.

[19] Wang R, Shen G, Huang M, Tian R. The diagnostic role of 18F-choline, 18F-fluciclovine and 18F-PSMA PET/CT in the detection of prostate cancer with biochemical recurrence: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11: 684629.

[20] Bodar YJL, Veerman H, Meijer D, de Bie K, van Leeuwen PJ, Donswijk ML, et al. Standardised uptake values as determined on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography is associated with oncological outcomes in patients with prostate cancer. BJU International. 2022; 129: 768–776.

[21] Hoffmann MA, Müller-Hübenthal J, Rosar F, Fischer N, von Eyben FE, Buchholz HG, et al. Primary staging of prostate cancer patients with [18F]PSMA-1007 PET/CT Compared with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11: 5064.

[22] Rodríguez Cabello MA, Méndez Rubio S, Platas Sancho A, Carballido Rodríguez J. Diagnostic evaluation and incorporation of PSA density and the prostate imaging and data reporting system (PIRADS) version 2 classification in risk-nomograms for prostate cancer. World Journal of Urology. 2022; 40: 2439–2450.

[23] Wei C, Chen T, Zhang Y, Pan P, Dai G, Yu H, et al. Biparametric prostate MRI and clinical indicators predict clinically significant prostate cancer in men with “gray zone” PSA levels. European Journal of Radiology. 2020; 127: 108977.

[24] Xu N, Wu Y, Chen D, Ke Z, Cai H, Wei Y, et al. Can prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with psa levels of 4–10 ng/mL? Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology. 2018; 144: 987–995.

[25] Campaña J, Bernal P. Prospective comparison of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, whole-body MRI and CT in primary nodal staging of unfavorable intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2021; 48: 2670–2671.

[26] Onal C, Ozyigit G, Oymak E, Guler OC, Hurmuz P, Tilki B, et al. Clinical parameters and nomograms for predicting lymph node metastasis detected with 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT in prostate cancer patients candidate to definitive radiotherapy. The Prostate. 2021; 81: 648–656.

[27] Franklin A, Yaxley W, Raveenthiran S, Coughlin G, Gianduzzo T, Kua B, et al. Histological comparison between predictive value of preoperative 3-T multiparametric MRI and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT scan for pathological outcomes at radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer. BJU international. 2021; 127: 71–79.

[28] Donswijk ML, van Leeuwen PJ, Vegt E, Cheung Z, Heijmink SWTPJ, van der Poel HG, et al. Clinical impact of PSMA PET/CT in primary prostate cancer compared to conventional nodal and distant staging: a retrospective single center study. BMC Cancer. 2020; 20: 723.

[29] Sachpekidis C, Bäumer P, Kopka K, Hadaschik B, Hohenfellner M, Kopp-Schneider A, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of bone metastases in prostate cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2018; 45: 904–912.

[30] Chow KM, So WZ, Lee HJ, Lee A, Yap DWT, Takwoingi Y, et al. Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and conventional imaging modalities for initial staging of intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Urology. 2023; 84: 36–48.