RESUMO
Interreader and intrareader reproducibility of 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT scans in newly diagnosed and recurrent prostate cancer patients was assessed from masked image evaluations from two phase 3 studies. Methods: 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT images of newly diagnosed (n = 352) or recurrent (n = 389) patients were evaluated by 3 masked readers. Cohen κ was used to assess pairwise patient- and region-level interreader agreement. Agreement among all readers was assessed using Fleiss κ. Intrareader agreement between the first and repeat read (20% of images, ≥4 wk later) was assessed using Cohen κ. Results: Pairwise interreader agreement was 95% or better (newly diagnosed) and 75% or better (recurrent). The κ coefficients were impacted by the high-agreement-low-κ paradox: Cohen κ ranged from not estimable to 0.55, whereas Fleiss κ was 0.50 (newly diagnosed) and 0.41 (recurrent). Agreement was highest in the prostate of newly diagnosed patients (≥95%) and in the pelvic lymph nodes in recurrent patients (≥87%). Intrareader agreement was 86% or better across both populations. Conclusion: 18F-flotufolastat PET/CT images can be reliably interpreted, with a high degree of inter- and intrareader agreement.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of urinary activity on interpretation of 18F-flotufolastat (18F-rhPSMA-7.3) PET/CT, we conducted a post hoc qualitative and quantitative analysis of scans acquired in two phase 3 studies of 18F-flotufolastat. PROCEDURES: Newly diagnosed or recurrent prostate cancer patients enrolled in LIGHTHOUSE (NCT04186819) or SPOTLIGHT (NCT04186845), respectively, underwent PET/CT 50-70 min after intravenous administration of 296 MBq 18F-flotufolastat. For the present analysis, 718 18F-flotufolastat scans (352 from LIGHTHOUSE and 366 from SPOTLIGHT) were re-evaluated by three board-certified nuclear medicine physicians. Reader 1 performed a quantitative assessment (SUVmax and SUVmean) of bladder activity in a circular region-of-interest over the maximum diameter of bladder activity in the transverse plane. All three readers qualitatively assessed the impact of any urinary activity in the bladder on image interpretation using a three-point scale (0 = no/minimal visible urinary activity, 1 = urinary activity visible but distinction between urine and disease possible and 2 = assessment inhibited by urinary activity) and the presence/absence of ureteric activity and halo artifacts. RESULTS: In total, 712/718 scans were evaluable. Reasons for exclusion were cystectomy, renal failure, or urinary catheter in situ (n = 2 each). The median bladder SUVmax and SUVmean were 17.1 and 12.5, respectively. By majority read, 682/712 (96%) patients had either no urinary activity (score = 0) or visible activity that could be distinguished from disease uptake (score = 1). In the minority of patients (24, 3.4%) where urinary activity did impact assessment (score = 2), the median bladder SUVmean was higher (20.5) than those scored 0 (3.8) or 1 (14.0). Ureteric activity was absent in 401 (56%) patients. Halo artifacts were observed in only two (0.3%) patients (majority read). CONCLUSIONS: 18F-Flotufolastat urinary activity did not influence disease assessment for the majority of patients. While this study was not designed as a head-to-head comparison, the median bladder SUVs are lower than previously reported values for other renally cleared PSMA-PET radiopharmaceuticals.