Prospective Comparison of F-18 Choline PET/CT Scan Versus Axial MRI for Detecting Bone Metastasis in Biochemically Relapsed Prostate Cancer Patients

Comparative Study of Different Imaging Modalities for Diagnosis of Bone Metastases of Prostate Cancer: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of 8 different imaging modalities for preoperative detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients by performing a network meta-analysis using direct comparison studies with 2 or more imaging techniques.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies evaluating the performances of 8 different imaging modalities for the preoperative detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients. The network meta-analysis was performed in patient-based analysis. The consistency was evaluated by examining the agreement between direct and indirect treatment effects, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were obtained to calculate the probability of each imaging modality being the most effective diagnostic method.

RESULTS

A total of 999 patients from 13 direct comparison studies using 8 different imaging modalities for preoperative detection or follow-up of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients were included. For the detection of bone metastases of prostate cancer, 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT showed the highest SUCRA values of sensitivity, positive predictive value, accuracy, and diagnostic odds ratio. In addition, 18 F-NaF PET/CT and SPECT/CT showed high SUCRA values.

CONCLUSIONS

68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT showed the highest SUCRA values. Other imaging modalities showed complementary diagnostic roles for preoperative detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer, except bone scintigraphy and MRI.

Comparison of PET/CT and MRI in the Diagnosis of Bone Metastasis in Prostate Cancer Patients: A Network Analysis of Diagnostic Studies

BACKGROUND

Accurate diagnosis of bone metastasis status of prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming increasingly more important in guiding local and systemic treatment. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have increasingly been utilized globally to assess the bone metastases in PCa. Our meta-analysis was a high-volume series in which the utility of PET/CT with different radioligands was compared to MRI with different parameters in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, were searched to retrieve original trials from their inception to August 31, 2019 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent investigators utilizing Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using an arm-based model. Absolute sensitivity and specificity, relative sensitivity and specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and superiority index, and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the diagnostic value.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies with 2,843 patients and 4,263 lesions were identified. Network meta-analysis reveals that 68Ga-labeled prostate membrane antigen (68Ga-PSMA) PET/CT has the highest superiority index (7.30) with the sensitivity of 0.91 and specificity of 0.99, followed by 18F-NaF, 11C-choline, 18F-choline, 18F-fludeoxyglucose (FDG), and 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT. The use of high magnetic field strength, multisequence, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and more imaging planes will increase the diagnostic value of MRI for the detection of bone metastasis in prostate cancer patients. Where available, 3.0-T high-quality MRI approaches 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT was performed in the detection of bone metastasis on patient-based level (sensitivity, 0.94 vs. 0.91; specificity, 0.94 vs. 0.96; superiority index, 4.43 vs. 4.56).

CONCLUSIONS

68Ga-PSMA PET/CT is recommended for the diagnosis of bone metastasis in prostate cancer patients. Where available, 3.0-T high-quality MRI approaches 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT should be performed in the detection of bone metastasis.

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer assessment: Current status and future directions

Over the past decade, updated definitions for the different stages of prostate cancer and risk for distant disease, along with the advent of new therapies, have remarkably changed the management of patients. The two expectations from imaging are accurate staging and appropriate assessment of disease response to therapies. Modern, next-generation imaging (NGI) modalities, including whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and nuclear medicine (most often prostate-specific membrane antigen [PSMA] positron emission tomography [PET]/computed tomography [CT]) bring added value to these imaging tasks. WB-MRI has proven its superiority over bone scintigraphy (BS) and CT for the detection of distant metastasis, also providing reliable evaluations of disease response to treatment. Comparison of the effectiveness of WB-MRI and molecular nuclear imaging techniques with regard to indications and the definition of their respective/complementary roles in clinical practice is ongoing. This paper illustrates the evolution of WB-MRI imaging protocols, defines the current state-of-the art, and highlights the latest developments and future challenges. The paper presents and discusses WB-MRI indications in the care pathway of men with prostate cancer in specific key situations: response assessment of metastatic disease, "all in one" cancer staging, and oligometastatic disease.

Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Background: Initial staging and assessment of treatment activity in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients is controversial. Indications for the various available imaging modalities are not well-established due to rapid advancements in imaging and treatment.

Methods: We conducted a critical literature review of the main imaging abnormalities that suggest a diagnosis of metastasis in localized and locally advanced PCa or in cases of biological relapse. We also assessed the role of the various imaging modalities available in routine clinical practice for the detection of metastases and response to treatment in metastatic PCa patients.

Results: In published clinical trials, the most commonly used imaging modalities for the detection and evaluation of therapeutic response are bone scan, abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), and pelvic and bone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For the detection and follow-up of metastases during treatment, modern imaging techniques i.e., choline-positron emission tomography (PET), fluciclovine-PET, or Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET provide better sensitivity and specificity. This is particularly the case of fluciclovine-PET and PSMA-PET in cases of biochemical recurrence with low values of prostate specific antigen.

Conclusions: In routine clinical practice, conventional imaging still have a role, and communication between imagers and clinicians should be encouraged. Present and future clinical trials should use modern imaging methods to clarify their usage.

Comparison of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, Sodium Fluoride (NaF) PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy (BS) in detecting bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase for articles published between January 1990 and September 2018. Two evaluators independently extracted the sensitivity, specificity, the numbers of true and false positives, and true and false negatives. We calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each method. We calculated the tests' diagnostic odds ratios (DOR); drew the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves; and obtained the areas under the curves (AUC), Q* values, and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

The per-patient pooled sensitivities of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and BS were 0.97, 0.87, 0.96, 0.91, and 0.86, respectively. The pooled specificities were 1.00, 0.99, 0.97, 0.96, and 0.95, respectively. The pooled DOR values were 504.16, 673.67, 242.63, and 114.44, respectively. The AUC were 1.00, 0.99, 0.99, 0.98, and 0.95, respectively. The per-lesion pooled sensitivities of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone imaging were 0.88, 0.80, 0.97, 0.81 and 0.68, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the meta-analysis, PSMA-PET/CT had the highest per-patient sensitivity and specificity in detecting bone metastases with prostate cancer. The sensitivities of NaF-PET/CT and MRI were better than those for choline-PET/CT and BS. The specificity of PSMA-PET/CT was significantly better than BS. Others were similar. For per-lesion, NaF-PET/CT had the highest sensitivity, PSMA-PET/CT had higher sensitivity than choline-PET/CT and MRI, and BS had the lowest sensitivity.

Diagnostic performance of choline PET/CT for the detection of bone metastasis in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the detection of bone metastasis in patients with prostate cancer.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 20 February 2018 for studies that used 11C-choline or 18F-choline PET/CT for the detection of bone metastasis in patients with prostate cancer and “histopathology and/or clinical follow-up” as the reference standard. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Pooled diagnostic accuracy with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using a bivariate random effects model. We also constructed hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves and performed meta-regression analyses.

Results

Fourteen studies with reasonable methodological quality were included in the analysis. On a per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.89 (95% CI 0.80–0.94), 0.98 (95% CI 0.95–0.99), 40.4 (95% CI 19.7–82.6), 0.12 (95% CI 0.07–0.20), and 344 (95% CI 148–803), respectively. On a per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR were 0.91 (95% CI 0.85–0.94), 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.98), 34.1 (95% CI 20.0–58.1), 0.10 (95% CI 0.06–0.16), and 358 (95% CI 165–778), respectively. In the meta-regression analysis, the clinical setting (staging vs. restaging) was the only source of study heterogeneity on a per-patient basis.

Conclusions

Choline PET/CT shows excellent diagnostic performance for the detection of bone metastasis. However, a negative choline PET/CT result cannot ensure the lack of bone metastasis.

Optimization of temporal sampling for 18F-choline uptake quantification in prostate cancer assessment

Background

Suboptimal temporal sampling of time-activity curves (TAC) from dynamic ¹⁸F-fluoromethylcholine (FCH) PET images may introduce bias in quantification of FCH uptake in prostate cancer assessment. We sought to define an optimal temporal sampling protocol for dynamic FCH PET imaging.

Seven different time samplings were tested: 5 × 60″, 10 × 30″, 15 × 15″–1 × 75″, 6 × 10″–8 × 30″, 12 × 5″–8 × 30″; 10 × 5″–4 × 10″–3 × 20″–5 × 30″, and 8 × 3″–8 × 12″–6 × 30″. First, the irreversible and reversible one-tissue compartment model with blood volume parameter (VB) (respectively, 1T1K+VB and 1T2k+VB, with K1 = transfer coefficient from the arterial blood to the tissue compartment and k2 = transfer coefficient from the tissue compartment to the arterial blood) were compared for 37 lesions from 32 patients who underwent FCH PET imaging for initial or recurrence assessment of prostate cancer, and the model was selected using the Akaike information criterion. To determine the optimal time sampling, K1 values extracted from 1000 noisy-simulated TAC using Monte Carlo method from the seven different time samplings were compared to a target K1 value which is the average of the K1 values extracted from the 37 lesions using an imaging-derived input function for each patient. K1 values extracted with the optimal time sampling for each tumoral lesion were compared to K1 values extracted from each of the other time samplings for the 37 lesions.

Results

The 1T2k + VB model was selected. The target K1 value as the objective was 0.506 mL/ccm/min (range 0.216–1.246). Results showed a significant difference between K1 values from the simulated TAC with the seven different time samplings analyzed. The closest K1 value from the simulated TAC to the target K1 value was obtained by the 12 × 5″–8 × 30″ time sampling. Concerning the clinical validation, K1 values extracted from the optimal time sampling (12 × 5″–8 × 30″) were significantly different with K1 values extracted from the other time samplings, except for the comparison with K1 values extracted from the 10 × 5″–4 × 10″–3 × 20″–5 × 30″ time sampling.

Conclusions

A two-phase framing of dynamic PET reconstruction with frame durations of 5 s (blood phase) and 30 s (tissue phase) could be used to sample the TAC for uptake quantification in prostate cancer assessment.