RESUMEN
Background and objectives: The association between prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and probability of metastatic disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has not yet been established in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa). Our objective was to assess the probability of metastatic disease within different PSA ranges using PSMA PET/CT for initial staging of PCa, and to identify both the anatomical distribution and the predictors of metastases on PSMA PET/CT. Methods: In total, 2193 patients with newly diagnosed PCa were retrospectively studied. PSMA PET/CT was performed for staging purposes between January 2017 and May 2022. The proportion of patients with PSMA-avid metastases, stratified by PSA level, was studied. A vast majority of patients in whom at least one high-risk prognostic factor was present underwent PSMA PET/CT. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of metastases on PSMA PET/CT using clinical, biochemical, radiological, and pathological variables. Key findings and limitations: The median PSA level at PSMA PET/CT was 14.1 ng/ml. Any metastatic disease (miN1-M1a-c) was observed in 34.7% (763/2193) of all patients and distant metastases (miM1a-c) in 25.4% (557/2193) of patients. The presence of any metastatic disease increased with PSA levels, being 15.4% in men with PSA levels <10 ng/ml and 87.5% in men with PSA levels >100 ng/ml. The multivariable logistic regression analysis found significant associations between the presence of any metastatic disease and PSA subgroups, clinical tumor stage ≥T2, grade group >3, and radiological tumor stage ≥T3b. Conclusions and clinical implications: This is the first large epidemiological study in patients with PCa demonstrating the association between PSA subgroups and metastatic disease on modern imaging PSMA PET/CT. Data from this study can be used to counsel patients on the probability of metastatic disease at the time of PSA screening and to provide guidance on existing guidelines. Patient summary: The prostate-specific antigen level could be used to assess the risk of metastases on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron (PSMA) emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). This knowledge is valuable for selecting patients who will benefit most from metastatic screening with PSMA PET/CT.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: PET with 16α-[18F]-fluoro-17ß-estradiol ([18F]FES) allows assessment of whole body estrogen receptor (ER) expression. The aim of this study was to investigate [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) and [18F]FES PET/CT imaging for response prediction and monitoring of drug activity in patients with metastatic ER-positive breast cancer undergoing treatment with the selective estrogen receptor downregulator (SERD) rintodestrant. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this trial (NCT03455270), PET/CT imaging was performed at baseline ([18F]FDG and [18F]FES), during treatment and at time of progression (only [18F]FES). Visual, quantitative, and mutational analysis was performed to derive a heterogeneity score (HS) and assess tracer uptake in lesions, in relation to the mutation profile. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The HS and PFS in the entire group did not correlate (n = 16, Spearman's rho, P = 0.06), but patients with a low HS (< 25.0%, n = 4) had a PFS of > 5 months whereas patients with no [18F]FES uptake (HS 100.0%, n = 3) had a PFS of < 2 months. [18F]FES uptake was not affected by estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations. On-treatment [18F]FES PET/CT scans showed no [18F]FES uptake in any of the baseline [18F]FES-positive lesions. At progression, [18F]FES uptake remained blocked in patients scanned ≤ 1-2 half-lives of rintodestrant whereas it restored in patients scanned ≥ 5 days after end of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Absence of ER expression on [18F]FES PET is a predictor for no response to rintodestrant. [18F]FES uptake during treatment and at time of progression is useful to monitor the (reversible) effect of therapy and continued mode of action of SERDs. See related commentary by Linden and Mankoff, p. 2015.