1
|
Ma KC, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Lay NS, Eclarinal P, Citrin DE, Pinto PA, Wood BJ, Dahut WL, Gulley JL, Madan RA, Choyke PL, Turkbey IB, Harmon SA. Deep learning-based whole-body PSMA PET/CT attenuation correction utilizing Pix-2-Pix GAN. Oncotarget 2024; 15:288-300. [PMID: 38712741 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.28583] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/08/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Sequential PET/CT studies oncology patients can undergo during their treatment follow-up course is limited by radiation dosage. We propose an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to produce attenuation-corrected PET (AC-PET) images from non-attenuation-corrected PET (NAC-PET) images to reduce need for low-dose CT scans. METHODS A deep learning algorithm based on 2D Pix-2-Pix generative adversarial network (GAN) architecture was developed from paired AC-PET and NAC-PET images. 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET-CT studies from 302 prostate cancer patients, split into training, validation, and testing cohorts (n = 183, 60, 59, respectively). Models were trained with two normalization strategies: Standard Uptake Value (SUV)-based and SUV-Nyul-based. Scan-level performance was evaluated by normalized mean square error (NMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), structural similarity index (SSIM), and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR). Lesion-level analysis was performed in regions-of-interest prospectively from nuclear medicine physicians. SUV metrics were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), repeatability coefficient (RC), and linear mixed-effects modeling. RESULTS Median NMSE, MAE, SSIM, and PSNR were 13.26%, 3.59%, 0.891, and 26.82, respectively, in the independent test cohort. ICC for SUVmax and SUVmean were 0.88 and 0.89, which indicated a high correlation between original and AI-generated quantitative imaging markers. Lesion location, density (Hounsfield units), and lesion uptake were all shown to impact relative error in generated SUV metrics (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The Pix-2-Pix GAN model for generating AC-PET demonstrates SUV metrics that highly correlate with original images. AI-generated PET images show clinical potential for reducing the need for CT scans for attenuation correction while preserving quantitative markers and image quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin C Ma
- Artificial Intelligence Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Nathan S Lay
- Artificial Intelligence Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Phillip Eclarinal
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - William L Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - James L Gulley
- Center for Immuno-Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Artificial Intelligence Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Ismail Baris Turkbey
- Artificial Intelligence Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Artificial Intelligence Resource, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gelikman DG, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Azar WS, Rathi N, Yilmaz EC, Harmon SA, Schuppe KC, Hsueh JY, Huth H, Wood BJ, Gurram S, Choyke PL, Pinto PA, Turkbey B. Reducing False-Positives Due to Urinary Stagnation in the Prostatic Urethra on 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT With MRI. Clin Nucl Med 2024:00003072-990000000-01083. [PMID: 38651785 DOI: 10.1097/rlu.0000000000005220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeting PET radiotracers reveal physiologic uptake in the urinary system, potentially misrepresenting activity in the prostatic urethra as an intraprostatic lesion. This study examined the correlation between midline 18F-DCFPyL activity in the prostate and hyperintensity on T2-weighted (T2W) MRI as an indication of retained urine in the prostatic urethra. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eighty-five patients who underwent both 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT and prostate MRI between July 2017 and September 2023 were retrospectively analyzed for midline radiotracer activity and retained urine on postvoid T2W MRIs. Fisher's exact tests and unpaired t tests were used to compare residual urine presence and prostatic urethra measurements between patients with and without midline radiotracer activity. The influence of anatomical factors including prostate volume and urethral curvature on urinary stagnation was also explored. RESULTS Midline activity on PSMA PET imaging was seen in 14 patients included in the case group, whereas the remaining 71 with no midline activity constituted the control group. A total of 71.4% (10/14) and 29.6% (21/71) of patients in the case and control groups had urethral hyperintensity on T2W MRI, respectively (P < 0.01). Patients in the case group had significantly larger mean urethral dimensions, larger prostate volumes, and higher incidence of severe urethral curvature compared with the controls. CONCLUSIONS Stagnated urine within the prostatic urethra is a potential confounding factor on PSMA PET scans. Integrating PET imaging with T2W MRI can mitigate false-positive calls, especially as PSMA PET/CT continues to gain traction in diagnosing localized prostate cancer.
Collapse
|
3
|
Li Y, Imami MR, Zhao L, Amindarolzarbi A, Mena E, Leal J, Chen J, Gafita A, Voter AF, Li X, Du Y, Zhu C, Choyke PL, Zou B, Jiao Z, Rowe SP, Pomper MG, Bai HX. An Automated Deep Learning-Based Framework for Uptake Segmentation and Classification on PSMA PET/CT Imaging of Patients with Prostate Cancer. J Imaging Inform Med 2024:10.1007/s10278-024-01104-y. [PMID: 38587770 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-024-01104-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2024] [Revised: 01/22/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
Uptake segmentation and classification on PSMA PET/CT are important for automating whole-body tumor burden determinations. We developed and evaluated an automated deep learning (DL)-based framework that segments and classifies uptake on PSMA PET/CT. We identified 193 [18F] DCFPyL PET/CT scans of patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer from two institutions, including 137 [18F] DCFPyL PET/CT scans for training and internally testing, and 56 scans from another institution for external testing. Two radiologists segmented and labelled foci as suspicious or non-suspicious for malignancy. A DL-based segmentation was developed with two independent CNNs. An anatomical prior guidance was applied to make the DL framework focus on PSMA-avid lesions. Segmentation performance was evaluated by Dice, IoU, precision, and recall. Classification model was constructed with multi-modal decision fusion framework evaluated by accuracy, AUC, F1 score, precision, and recall. Automatic segmentation of suspicious lesions was improved under prior guidance, with mean Dice, IoU, precision, and recall of 0.700, 0.566, 0.809, and 0.660 on the internal test set and 0.680, 0.548, 0.749, and 0.740 on the external test set. Our multi-modal decision fusion framework outperformed single-modal and multi-modal CNNs with accuracy, AUC, F1 score, precision, and recall of 0.764, 0.863, 0.844, 0.841, and 0.847 in distinguishing suspicious and non-suspicious foci on the internal test set and 0.796, 0.851, 0.865, 0.814, and 0.923 on the external test set. DL-based lesion segmentation on PSMA PET is facilitated through our anatomical prior guidance strategy. Our classification framework differentiates suspicious foci from those not suspicious for cancer with good accuracy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang Li
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
- School of Informatics, Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha, 410208, China
| | - Maliha R Imami
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Linmei Zhao
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Alireza Amindarolzarbi
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, 20892, USA
| | - Jeffrey Leal
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Junyu Chen
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Andrei Gafita
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Andrew F Voter
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Xin Li
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Yong Du
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Chengzhang Zhu
- School of Computer Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, China
| | | | - Beiji Zou
- School of Informatics, Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Changsha, 410208, China
- School of Computer Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, 410083, China
| | - Zhicheng Jiao
- Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, 02903, USA
| | - Steven P Rowe
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Martin G Pomper
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Harrison X Bai
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Leung KH, Rowe SP, Sadaghiani MS, Leal JP, Mena E, Choyke PL, Du Y, Pomper MG. Deep Semisupervised Transfer Learning for Fully Automated Whole-Body Tumor Quantification and Prognosis of Cancer on PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2024; 65:643-650. [PMID: 38423786 PMCID: PMC10995523 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.267048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2023] [Revised: 01/29/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Automatic detection and characterization of cancer are important clinical needs to optimize early treatment. We developed a deep, semisupervised transfer learning approach for fully automated, whole-body tumor segmentation and prognosis on PET/CT. Methods: This retrospective study consisted of 611 18F-FDG PET/CT scans of patients with lung cancer, melanoma, lymphoma, head and neck cancer, and breast cancer and 408 prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT scans of patients with prostate cancer. The approach had a nnU-net backbone and learned the segmentation task on 18F-FDG and PSMA PET/CT images using limited annotations and radiomics analysis. True-positive rate and Dice similarity coefficient were assessed to evaluate segmentation performance. Prognostic models were developed using imaging measures extracted from predicted segmentations to perform risk stratification of prostate cancer based on follow-up prostate-specific antigen levels, survival estimation of head and neck cancer by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis, and pathologic complete response prediction of breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Overall accuracy and area under the receiver-operating-characteristic (AUC) curve were assessed. Results: Our approach yielded median true-positive rates of 0.75, 0.85, 0.87, and 0.75 and median Dice similarity coefficients of 0.81, 0.76, 0.83, and 0.73 for patients with lung cancer, melanoma, lymphoma, and prostate cancer, respectively, on the tumor segmentation task. The risk model for prostate cancer yielded an overall accuracy of 0.83 and an AUC of 0.86. Patients classified as low- to intermediate- and high-risk had mean follow-up prostate-specific antigen levels of 18.61 and 727.46 ng/mL, respectively (P < 0.05). The risk score for head and neck cancer was significantly associated with overall survival by univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses (P < 0.05). Predictive models for breast cancer predicted pathologic complete response using only pretherapy imaging measures and both pre- and posttherapy measures with accuracies of 0.72 and 0.84 and AUCs of 0.72 and 0.76, respectively. Conclusion: The proposed approach demonstrated accurate tumor segmentation and prognosis in patients across 6 cancer types on 18F-FDG and PSMA PET/CT scans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin H Leung
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland;
| | - Steven P Rowe
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; and
| | - Moe S Sadaghiani
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Jeffrey P Leal
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yong Du
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Martin G Pomper
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lee KH, Mena E, Shih J, Lindenberg L, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Patel KR, Citrin DE, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Predicting 18F-DCFPyL-PET/CT Scan Positivity in Prostate Cancer Patients with Biochemical Recurrence. Acad Radiol 2024; 31:1419-1428. [PMID: 37775447 PMCID: PMC10965502 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.09.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Revised: 08/31/2023] [Accepted: 09/01/2023] [Indexed: 10/01/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To analyze variables that can predict the positivity of 18F-DCFPyL- positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and extent of disease in patients with biochemically recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer after primary local therapy with either radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective single institutional review board-approved study. We included 199 patients with biochemical recurrence and negative conventional imaging after primary local therapies (radical prostatectomy n = 127, radiation therapy n = 72). All patients underwent 18F-DCFPyL-PET/CT. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictors of a positive scan for both cohort of patients. Regression-based coefficients were used to develop nomograms predicting scan positivity and extra-pelvic disease. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was implemented to quantify nomogram's clinical benefit. RESULTS Of the 127 (63%) post-radical prostatectomy patients, 91 patients had positive scans - 61 of those with intrapelvic lesions and 30 with extra-pelvic lesions (i.e., retroperitoneal or distant nodes and/or bone/organ lesions). Of the 72 post-radiation therapy patients, 65 patients had positive scans - 39 of them had intrapelvic lesions and 26 extra-pelvic lesions. In the radical prostatectomy cohort, multivariate regression analysis revealed original International Society of Urological Pathology category, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSAdt), and time from BCR (mo) to scan were predictors for scan positivity and presence of extra-pelvic disease, with an area under the curve of 80% and 78%, respectively. Positive versus negative tumor margin after radical prostatectomy was not related to scan positivity or to the presence of positive extra-pelvic foci. In the radiation therapy cohort, multivariate regression analysis revealed that PSA, PSAdt, and time to BCR (mo) were predictors of extra-pelvic disease, with area under the curve of 82%. Because only seven patients in the radiation therapy cohort had negative scans, a prediction model for scan positivity could not be analyzed and only the presence of extra-pelvic disease was evaluated. CONCLUSION PSA and PSAdt are consistently significant predictors of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT positivity and extra-pelvic disease in BCR prostate cancer patients. Stratifying the patient population into primary local treatment group enables the use of other variables as predictors, such as time since BCR. This nomogram may guide selection of the most suitable candidates for 18F-DCFPyL-PET/CT imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katerina H Lee
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., E.M., L.L., P.L.C., B.T.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., B.J.W.)
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., E.M., L.L., P.L.C., B.T.).
| | - Joanna Shih
- Division Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (J.S.)
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., E.M., L.L., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., B.J.W.)
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (P.A.P.)
| | - Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.R.P., D.E.C.)
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.R.P., D.E.C.)
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., E.M., L.L., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (K.H.L., E.M., L.L., P.L.C., B.T.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Patel KR, Rydzewski NR, Schott E, Cooley-Zgela T, Ning H, Cheng J, Salerno K, Huang EP, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Turkbey B, Citrin DE. A Phase 1 Trial of Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer After Brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)00323-7. [PMID: 38428681 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2023] [Revised: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE NCT03253744 is a phase 1 trial with the primary objective to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with local prostate cancer recurrence after brachytherapy. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response. METHODS AND MATERIALS This trial was initially designed to test 3 therapeutic dose levels (DLs): 40 Gy (DL1), 42.5 Gy (DL2), and 45 Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions. Intensity modulation was used to deliver the prescription dose to the magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based positron emission tomography imaging-defined gross tumor volume while simultaneously delivering 30 Gy to an elective volume defined by the prostate gland. This phase 1 trial followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities were scored until trial completion at 2 years post-SBRT using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Escalation was halted if 2 dose limiting toxicities occurred, defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT or any grade ≥3 genitourinary (GU) or grade 4 gastrointestinal toxicity thereafter. RESULTS Between August 2018 and January 2023, 9 patients underwent salvage SBRT and were observed for a median of 22 months (Q1-Q3, 20-43 months). No grade 3 to 5 adverse events related to study treatment were observed; thus, no dose limiting toxicities occurred during the observation period. Escalation was halted by amendment given excellent biochemical control in DL1 and DL2 in the setting of a high incidence of clinically significant late grade 2 GU toxicity. Therefore, the MTD was considered 42.5 Gy in 5 fractions (DL2). One- and 2-year biochemical progression-free survival were 100% and 86%, representing a single patient in the trial cohort with biochemical failure (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] nadir + 2.0) at 20 months posttreatment. CONCLUSIONS The MTD of salvage SBRT for the treatment of intraprostatic radiorecurrence after brachytherapy was 42.5 Gy in 5 fractions producing an 86% 2-year biochemical progression-free survival rate, with 1 poststudy failure at 20 months. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade 2 GU toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| | - Nicholas R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Jason Cheng
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erich P Huang
- Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Belue MJ, Harmon SA, Yang D, An JY, Gaur S, Law YM, Turkbey E, Xu Z, Tetreault J, Lay NS, Yilmaz EC, Phelps TE, Simon B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Pinto PA, Bagci U, Wood BJ, Citrin DE, Dahut WL, Madan RA, Gulley JL, Xu D, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Deep Learning-Based Detection and Classification of Bone Lesions on Staging Computed Tomography in Prostate Cancer: A Development Study. Acad Radiol 2024:S1076-6332(24)00008-4. [PMID: 38262813 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2023] [Revised: 01/02/2024] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 01/25/2024]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Efficiently detecting and characterizing metastatic bone lesions on staging CT is crucial for prostate cancer (PCa) care. However, it demands significant expert time and additional imaging such as PET/CT. We aimed to develop an ensemble of two automated deep learning AI models for 1) bone lesion detection and segmentation and 2) benign vs. metastatic lesion classification on staging CTs and to compare its performance with radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study developed two AI models using 297 staging CT scans (81 metastatic) with 4601 benign and 1911 metastatic lesions in PCa patients. Metastases were validated by follow-up scans, bone biopsy, or PET/CT. Segmentation AI (3DAISeg) was developed using the lesion contours delineated by a radiologist. 3DAISeg performance was evaluated with the Dice similarity coefficient, and classification AI (3DAIClass) performance on AI and radiologist contours was assessed with F1-score and accuracy. Training/validation/testing data partitions of 70:15:15 were used. A multi-reader study was performed with two junior and two senior radiologists within a subset of the testing dataset (n = 36). RESULTS In 45 unseen staging CT scans (12 metastatic PCa) with 669 benign and 364 metastatic lesions, 3DAISeg detected 73.1% of metastatic (266/364) and 72.4% of benign lesions (484/669). Each scan averaged 12 extra segmentations (range: 1-31). All metastatic scans had at least one detected metastatic lesion, achieving a 100% patient-level detection. The mean Dice score for 3DAISeg was 0.53 (median: 0.59, range: 0-0.87). The F1 for 3DAIClass was 94.8% (radiologist contours) and 92.4% (3DAISeg contours), with a median false positive of 0 (range: 0-3). Using radiologist contours, 3DAIClass had PPV and NPV rates comparable to junior and senior radiologists: PPV (semi-automated approach AI 40.0% vs. Juniors 32.0% vs. Seniors 50.0%) and NPV (AI 96.2% vs. Juniors 95.7% vs. Seniors 91.9%). When using 3DAISeg, 3DAIClass mimicked junior radiologists in PPV (pure-AI 20.0% vs. Juniors 32.0% vs. Seniors 50.0%) but surpassed seniors in NPV (pure-AI 93.8% vs. Juniors 95.7% vs. Seniors 91.9%). CONCLUSION Our lesion detection and classification AI model performs on par with junior and senior radiologists in discerning benign and metastatic lesions on staging CTs obtained for PCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mason J Belue
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Dong Yang
- NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, California, USA (D.Y., Z.X., J.T., D.X.)
| | - Julie Y An
- Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA (J.Y.A.)
| | - Sonia Gaur
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (S.G.)
| | - Yan Mee Law
- Department of Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore (Y.M.L.)
| | - Evrim Turkbey
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (E.T., B.J.W.)
| | - Ziyue Xu
- NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, California, USA (D.Y., Z.X., J.T., D.X.)
| | - Jesse Tetreault
- NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, California, USA (D.Y., Z.X., J.T., D.X.)
| | - Nathan S Lay
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Enis C Yilmaz
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Tim E Phelps
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Benjamin Simon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (P.A.P.)
| | - Ulas Bagci
- Radiology and Biomedical Engineering Department, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA (U.B.)
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (E.T., B.J.W.); Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (B.J.W.)
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (D.E.C.)
| | - William L Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (W.L.D., R.A.M.)
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (W.L.D., R.A.M.)
| | - James L Gulley
- Center for Immuno-Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (J.L.G.)
| | - Daguang Xu
- NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, California, USA (D.Y., Z.X., J.T., D.X.)
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.)
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., MSC 1182, Building 10, Room B3B85, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (M.J.B., S.A.H., N.S.L., E.C.Y., T.E.P., B.S., L.L., E.M., P.L.C., B.T.).
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
[68Ga]Ga-PentixaFor, a PET agent targeting CXCR4 is emerging as a versatile radiotracer with promising applications in oncology, cardiology and inflammatory disease. Preclinical work in various cancer cell lines have demonstrated high specificity and selectivity. In human investigations of several tumors, the most promising applications may be in multiple myeloma, certain lymphomas and myeloproliferative neoplasms. In the nononcologic setting, [68Ga]Ga-PentixaFor could greatly improve detection for primary aldosteronism and other endocrine abnormalities. Similarly, atherosclerotic disease and other inflammatory conditions could also benefit from enhanced identification by CXCR4 targeting. Rapidly cleared from the body with a favorable imaging and radiation dosimetry profile that has been already studied in over 1000 patients, [68Ga]Ga-PentixaFor is a worthy agent for further clinical exploration with potential for theranostic applications in hematologic malignancies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD.
| | - Mark Ahlman
- Department of Radiology and Imaging, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA
| | - Frank Lin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Patel KR, Rydzewski NR, Schott E, Cooley-Zgela T, Ning H, Cheng J, Salerno K, Huang EP, Pinto PA, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Turkbey B, Citrin DE. A Phase 1 Trial of Focal Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. Pract Radiat Oncol 2023; 13:540-550. [PMID: 37442430 PMCID: PMC10782822 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 05/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE NCT03253744 was a phase 1 trial to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of image-guided, focal, salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response. METHODS AND MATERIALS The trial design included 3 dose levels (DLs): 40 Gy (DL1), 42.5 Gy (DL2), and 45 Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions delivered ≥48 hours apart. The prescription dose was delivered to the magnetic resonance- and prostate-specific membrane antigen imaging-defined tumor volume. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities were scored until 2 years after completion of SBRT using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, criteria. Escalation was halted if 2 dose-limiting toxicities occurred, defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT and any grade 3 genitourinary (GU) or grade 4 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity thereafter. RESULTS Between August 2018 and May 2022, 8 patients underwent salvage focal SBRT, with a median follow-up of 35 months. No dose-limiting toxic effects were observed on DL1. Two patients were enrolled in DL2 and experienced grade 3 GU toxicities, prompting de-escalation and expansion (n = 6) at the MTD (DL1). The most common toxicities observed were grade ≥2 GU toxicities, with only a single grade 2 GI toxicity and no grade ≥3 GI toxicities. One patient experienced biochemical failure (prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2.0) at 33 months. CONCLUSIONS The MTD for focal salvage SBRT for isolated intraprostatic radiorecurrence was 40 Gy in 5 fractions, producing a 100% 24-month biochemical progression free survival, with 1 poststudy failure at 33 months. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade ≥2 GU toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland.
| | - Nicholas R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Jason Cheng
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erich P Huang
- Biometric Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gandhy SU, Karzai FH, Bilusic M, McMahon S, Cordes LM, Marte J, Weisman AJ, Perk TG, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Arlen PM, Dahut WL, Figg WD, Choyke P, Gulley JL, Madan RA. Quantitative Analysis of Serial Positron Emission Tomography Imaging in Men with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Enzalutamide. Eur Urol Oncol 2023:S2588-9311(23)00205-5. [PMID: 37858437 PMCID: PMC11021375 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2023] [Revised: 08/18/2023] [Accepted: 09/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The emergence of positron emission tomography (PET) in prostate cancer is impacting clinical practice, but little is known about PET imaging as a tool to determine treatment failure in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). OBJECTIVE To evaluate PET imaging dynamics in mCRPC patients on enzalutamide with stable computed tomography (CT) and technetium-99m (Tc99) bone scans. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS All patients were on treatment with enzalutamide for first-line mCRPC in a clinical trial at the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD, USA). A volunteer sample had serial 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) PET in parallel with CT and Tc99. Regions of interest (ROIs) on NaF were analyzed quantitatively for response. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized to enzalutamide with/without a cancer immunotherapy, Prostvac. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS A post hoc, descriptive analysis was performed comparing the changes seen on CT and Tc99 as per RECIST 1.1 with NaF PET scans including the use of a quantitative analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Eighteen mCRPC patients had 67 NaF scans. A total of 233 ROIs resolved after treatment, 52 (22%) of which eventually retuned while on therapy. In all, 394 new ROIs were seen, but 112(28%) resolved subsequently. Of 18 patients, 14 had new ROIs that ultimately resolved after appearing. Many patients experienced progression in a minority of lesions, and one patient with radiation intervention to oligoprogression had a remarkable response. This study is limited by its small number of patients and post hoc nature. CONCLUSIONS These data highlight the dynamic nature of NaF PET in mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide, where not all new findings were ultimately related to disease progression. This analysis also provides a potential strategy to identify and intervene in oligoprogression in prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY In this small analysis of patients with prostate cancer on enzalutamide, changes on 18F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography (PET) imaging were not always associated with treatment failure. Caution may be indicated when using PET imaging to determine whether new therapy is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shruti U Gandhy
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Fatima H Karzai
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Marijo Bilusic
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Sheri McMahon
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Lisa M Cordes
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jennifer Marte
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | | | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Philip M Arlen
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - William L Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - William D Figg
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - James L Gulley
- Center for Immuno-Oncology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Gubbi S, Al-Jundi M, Auh S, Jha A, Zou J, Shamis I, Meuter L, Knue M, Turkbey B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Carrasquillo JA, Teng Y, Pacak K, Klubo-Gwiezdzinska J, Del Rivero J, Lin FI. Early short-term effects on catecholamine levels and pituitary function in patients with pheochromocytoma or paraganglioma treated with [ 177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE therapy. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2023; 14:1275813. [PMID: 37886645 PMCID: PMC10598842 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1275813] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2023] [Accepted: 09/28/2023] [Indexed: 10/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose While there are reports of treatment-related endocrine disruptions and catecholamine surges in pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma (PPGL) patients treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE therapy, the spectrum of these abnormalities in the immediate post-treatment period (within 48 hours) has not been previously evaluated and is likely underestimated. Methods The study population included patients (≥18 years) enrolled in a phase 2 trial for treatment of somatostatin receptor (SSTR)-2+ inoperable/metastatic pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma with [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (7.4 GBq per cycle for 1 - 4 cycles). Hormonal measurements [adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol, thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (FT4), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), testosterone, estradiol, growth hormone, prolactin], catecholamines, and metanephrines were obtained on days-1, 2, 3, 30, and 60 per cycle as per trial protocol, and were retrospectively analyzed. Results Among the 27 patients (age: 54 ± 12.7 years, 48.1% females) who underwent hormonal evaluation, hypoprolactinemia (14.1%), elevated FSH (13.1%), and elevated LH (12.5%) were the most frequent hormonal abnormalities across all 4 cycles combined. On longitudinal follow-up, significant reductions were noted in i. ACTH without corresponding changes in cortisol, ii. TSH, and FT4, and iii. prolactin at or before day-30 of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE. No significant changes were observed in the gonadotropic axis and GH levels. Levels of all hormones on day-60 were not significantly different from day-1 values, suggesting the transient nature of these changes. However, two patients developed clinical, persistent endocrinopathies (primary hypothyroidism: n=1 male; early menopause: n=1 female). Compared to day-1, a significant % increase in norepinephrine, dopamine, and normetanephrine levels were noted at 24 hours following [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE dose and peaked within 48 hours. Conclusions [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE therapy is associated with alterations in endocrine function likely from radiation exposure to SSTR2+ endocrine tissues. However, these changes may sometimes manifest as clinically significant endocrinopathies. It is therefore important to periodically assess endocrine function during [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE therapy, especially among symptomatic patients. Clinical trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03206060?term=NCT03206060&draw=2&rank=1, identifier NCT03206060.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sriram Gubbi
- Metabolic Diseases Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Mohammad Al-Jundi
- Department of Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Sungyoung Auh
- Metabolic Diseases Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Abhishek Jha
- Department of Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Joy Zou
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Inna Shamis
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Leah Meuter
- Department of Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Marianne Knue
- Department of Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Jorge A. Carrasquillo
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Yating Teng
- Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Karel Pacak
- Department of Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Joanna Klubo-Gwiezdzinska
- Metabolic Diseases Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Jaydira Del Rivero
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| | - Frank I. Lin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Patel K, Rydzewski NR, Schott EE, Cooley-Zgela TC, Ning H, Cheng JY, Pinto PA, Salerno KE, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Citrin DE. A Phase I Trial of Focal Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:e426-e427. [PMID: 37785396 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.06.1587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) Locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy (RT) is an increasingly recognized entity with no standard management. NCT03253744 was a phase I trial with a primary objective of identifying the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of a course of image-guided, focal, salvage stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with local recurrence after prior definitive RT. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response on mpMRI and 18F-DCFPyL (PSMA) PET/CT. MATERIALS/METHODS SBRT was prescribed to three dose levels (DLs): 40Gy (DL1), 42.5Gy (DL2), and 45Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions. The prescription dose was delivered to a PTV defined by mpMRI and PSMA imaging and biopsy confirmed tumor volume. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities above baseline were scored using CTCAE v5.0 criteria for two years after completion of SBRT. Escalation was halted if 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. DLTs were defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT, and any grade 3 GU or grade 4 GI toxicity thereafter. Imaging response was compared between baseline and 6-months by the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS Between 08/2018 and 05/2022, 8 patients underwent salvage SBRT to 11 intraprostatic lesions with a median follow-up of 27 months. No DLTs were observed on DL1. Two patients were enrolled on DL2 and both experienced grade 3 GU toxicities, prompting de-escalation and expansion (n = 6) on DL1, the MTD. The most common toxicities were grade 2 GU toxicities: acute urinary urgency/frequency, acute weak urinary stream, and noninfective cystitis. One patient at DL1 had a self-limited episode of grade 2 GI toxicity (proctitis). No grade 3 GI toxicities were observed. All but two patients achieved an undetectable PSA nadir. Only one of these experienced biochemical failure (nadir + 2.0) at 33 months with suspicion of distant metastatic failure on restaging PET/CT. Imaging response was demonstrated by MRI in all lesions with heterogeneity in volumetric response (6% to 100%). A significant (p<0.01) response on PSMA PET/CT was observed for all measured parameters (SUVMax, SUVMean, GTVPSMA, Total Lesion PSMA [SUVMean × GTVPSMA]). Of the 11 lesions, 1 (9%) demonstrated a complete response (CR) by MRI and 9 (82%) by PSMA PET/CT. A single lesion increased in volume by 0.06 cc (16%) at 6-month PSMA PET/CT compared to baseline in the only patient who did not achieve an undetectable PSA nadir and did not have imaging suggestive of distant failure. CONCLUSION On this phase I dose escalation study of salvage SBRT for isolated intraprostatic local failure after definitive RT, the MTD was 40Gy in 5 fractions. producing a 100% 24-month bPFS, with one late failure at 33 months occurring after the 24-month study period. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade 2 GU toxicity. Imaging response was demonstrated in all lesions on MRI and PSMA PET/CT with exception of a single lesion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - N R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - E E Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - T C Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - H Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - J Y Cheng
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - P A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - K E Salerno
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - L Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - E Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - B Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| | - P Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - D E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Phelps TE, Harmon SA, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Shih JH, Citrin DE, Pinto PA, Wood BJ, Dahut WL, Gulley JL, Madan RA, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Predicting Outcomes of Indeterminate Bone Lesions on 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT Scans in the Setting of High-Risk Primary or Recurrent Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med 2023; 64:395-401. [PMID: 36265908 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.122.264334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2022] [Revised: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Indeterminate bone lesions (IBLs) on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT are common. This study aimed to define variables that predict whether such lesions are likely malignant or benign using features on PSMA PET/CT. Methods: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging was performed on 243 consecutive patients with high-risk primary or biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. IBLs identified on PSMA PET/CT could not definitively be interpreted as benign or malignant. Medical records of patients with IBLs were reviewed to determine the ultimate status of each lesion. IBLs were deemed malignant or benign on the basis of evidence of progression or stability at follow-up, respectively, or by biopsy results; IBLs were deemed equivocal when insufficient or unclear evidence existed. Post hoc patient, lesion, and scan variables accounting for clustered data were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum and χ2 tests to determine features that favored benign or malignant interpretation. Results: Overall, 98 IBLs within 267 bone lesions (36.7%) were identified in 48 of 243 patients (19.8%). Thirty-seven of 98 IBLs were deemed benign, and 42 were deemed malignant, of which 8 had histologic verification; 19 remained equivocal. Location and SUVmax categorical variables were predictive of IBL interpretation (P = 0.0201 and P = 0.0230, respectively). For IBLs with new interpretations, 34 of 37 (91.9%) considered benign showed an SUVmax of less than 5 or exhibited focal uptake without coexisting bone metastases; 37 of 42 (88.1%) deemed malignant demonstrated an SUVmax of at least 5 or were present with coexisting bone metastases. Logistic regression predicted IBLs with a high SUVmax (univariable: odds ratio [OR], 9.29 [P = 0.0016]; multivariable: OR, 13.87 [P = 0.0089]) or present with other bone metastases (univariable: OR, 9.87 [P = 0.0112]; multivariable: OR, 11.35 [P = 0.003]) to be malignant. Conclusion: IBLs on PSMA PET/CT are concerning; however, characterizing their location, SUV, and additional scan findings can aid interpretation. IBLs displaying an SUVmax of at least 5 or present with other bone metastases favor malignancy. IBLs without accompanying bone metastases that exhibit an SUVmax of less than 5 and are observed only in atypical locations favor benign processes. These guidelines may assist in the interpretation of IBLs on PSMA PET/CT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tim E Phelps
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland;
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Joanna H Shih
- Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; and
| | - William L Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - James L Gulley
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Salerno KE, Roy S, Ribaudo C, Fisher T, Patel RB, Mena E, Escorcia FE. A Primer on Radiopharmaceutical Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:48-59. [PMID: 35970373 PMCID: PMC9772089 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Revised: 07/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
The goal of this article is to serve as a primer for the United States-based radiation oncologist who may be interested in learning more about radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT). Specifically, we define RPT, review the data behind its current and anticipated indications, and discuss important regulatory considerations for incorporating it into clinical practice. RPT represents an opportunity for radiation oncologists to leverage 2 key areas of expertise, namely therapeutic radiation therapy and oncology, and apply them in a distinct context in collaboration with nuclear medicine and medical oncology colleagues. Although not every radiation oncologist will incorporate RPT into their day-to-day practice, it is important to understand the role for this modality and how it can be appropriately used in select patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kilian E Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Radiation Oncology Department, Rush Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Cathy Ribaudo
- Division of Radiation Safety, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Teresa Fisher
- Division of Radiation Safety, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ravi B Patel
- Radiation Oncology Department, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Freddy E Escorcia
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ponce-Robles L, Mena E, Diaz S, Pagán-Muñoz A, Lara-Guillén AJ, Fellahi I, Alarcón JJ. Integrated full-scale solar CPC/UV-LED–filtration system as a tertiary treatment in a conventional WWTP for agricultural reuse purposes. Photochem Photobiol Sci 2022; 22:641-654. [PMID: 36401770 PMCID: PMC9676787 DOI: 10.1007/s43630-022-00342-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 11/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
AbstractToday, the emergence of increasingly restrictive treatment and reuse policies make the implementation of full-scale tertiary treatment, capable of improving the quality of water, a priority. Full-scale TiO2 photocatalysis systems are resulting in a promising option, since TiO2 is commercially available. However, questions such as how to work continuously during day/night irradiation cycle, or the removing of TiO2 in outlet flow are still unresolved. In this work, a full-scale system integrating a solar CPC/UV-LED step combined with commercial microfiltration membranes was installed in a conventional WWTP for agricultural reuse purposes. After optimization, 0.5 g/L of catalyst and combined SOLAR + UV-LED showing the highest pharmaceutical removal percentages, while a self-designed UV-LED included in the own reaction tank resulting in higher efficiencies compared with commercial lamps. Longer membrane surface area decreased fouling problems in the system. However, 60 min of irradiation time was necessary to reach the most restrictive water quality values according with (EU 2020/741). After optimization step, total costs were reduced by 45%. However, it was shown that a reduction in operating and maintenance costs, along with the development of more effective and economical commercial filtration membranes is a key factor; therefore, working on these aspects is essential in the treated water cost reduction.
Graphical abstract
Collapse
|
16
|
Ulaner GA, Thomsen B, Bassett J, Torrey R, Cox C, Lin K, Patel T, Techasith T, Mauguen A, Rowe SP, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Yoshida J. 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT for Initially Diagnosed and Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Prospective Trial with Pathologic Confirmation. Radiology 2022; 305:419-428. [PMID: 35852431 PMCID: PMC9619197 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.220218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Revised: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 05/17/2022] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
Background Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET is standard for newly diagnosed high-risk and biochemically recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer. Although studies suggest high specificity of 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[(18)F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (DCFPyL) for targeting PSMA, false-positive findings have been identified and most studies lack histologic confirmation of malignancy. Purpose To estimate the positive predictive value (PPV) of DCFPyL PET/CT by providing histopathologic proof for DCFPyL-avid lesions suspected of being distant metastases at initial diagnosis and recurrence in BCR prostate cancer. Materials and Methods In this prospective trial, men with newly diagnosed high-risk prostate cancer (sample 1) or BCR prostate cancer and negative findings at conventional CT and/or bone scanning (sample 2) were enrolled between January and December 2021. All men underwent DCFPyL PET/CT. Suspected distant metastases and/or recurrences were biopsied. PPV was calculated. Results A total of 92 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer (median age, 70 years; IQR, 64-75 years) (sample 1) and 92 men with BCR prostate cancer (median age, 71 years; IQR, 66-75 years) (sample 2) were enrolled. In sample 1, 25 of the 92 men (27%) demonstrated DCFPyL-avid lesions suspicious for distant metastases. Biopsy was performed in 23 of the 25 men (92%), with 17 of the 23 (74%) biopsies positive for malignancy and six (26%) benign. Of the six benign biopsies, three were solitary rib foci and three were solitary pelvic bone foci. In sample 2, 57 of the 92 men (62%) demonstrated DCFPyL-avid lesions suspicious for recurrence. Biopsy was performed in 37 of the 57 men (65%), with 33 of the 37 (89%) biopsies positive for malignancy and four (11%) benign. Of the four benign biopsies, two were subcentimeter pelvic nodes and/or nodules, one was a rib, and one was a pelvic bone focus. Conclusion PET/CT with 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[(18)F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (DCFPyL) had a high biopsy-proven positive predictive value for distant metastases in newly diagnosed prostate cancer (74%) and for recurrence sites in men with biochemical recurrence (89%). However, there were DCFPyL-avid false-positive findings (particularly in ribs and pelvic bones). Solitary DCFPyL avidity in these locations should not be presumed as malignant. Biopsy may still be needed prior to therapy decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT04700332 © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Zukotynski and Kuo in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary A. Ulaner
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Beth Thomsen
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Jeffrey Bassett
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Robert Torrey
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Craig Cox
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Kevin Lin
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Trushar Patel
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Tust Techasith
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Audrey Mauguen
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Steven P. Rowe
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Esther Mena
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Peter Choyke
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| | - Jeffrey Yoshida
- From the Departments of Molecular Imaging and Therapy (G.A.U., B.T.),
Urology (J.B., R.T., J.Y.), Radiation Oncology (C.C., K.L.), and Radiology
(T.P., T.T.), Hoag Family Cancer Institute, 16105 Sand Canyon Ave, Irvine, CA
92618; Departments of Radiology and Translational Genomics, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif (G.A.U.); Department of Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (A.M.); The
Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns
Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (S.P.R.); and Molecular
Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Md (L.L., E.M., P.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Madan RA, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Choyke PL. With New Technology Comes Great Responsibility: Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Imaging in Recurrent Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:3015-3019. [PMID: 35658513 PMCID: PMC9851688 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00493] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Revised: 03/28/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ravi A. Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Mena E, Rowe SP, Shih JH, Lindenberg L, Turkbey B, Fourquet A, Lin FI, Adler S, Eclarinal P, McKinney YL, Citrin DE, Dahut W, Wood BJ, Chang R, Levy E, Merino M, Gorin MA, Pomper MG, Pinto PA, Eary JF, Choyke PL, Pienta KJ. Predictors of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Positivity in Patients with Biochemical Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Local Therapy. J Nucl Med 2022; 63:1184-1190. [PMID: 34916246 PMCID: PMC9364352 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 12/02/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the factors predicting scan positivity and disease location in patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after primary local therapy using prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT. Methods: This was a 2-institution study including 245 BCR PCa patients after primary local therapy and negative results on conventional imaging. The patients underwent 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT. We tested for correlations of lesion detection rate and disease location with tumor characteristics, time from initial therapy, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and PSA doubling time (PSAdt). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine predictors of a positive scan. Regression-based coefficients were used to develop nomograms predicting scan positivity and extrapelvic disease. Results: Overall, 79.2% (194/245) of patients had a positive 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT result, with detection rates of 48.2% (27/56), 74.3% (26/35), 84% (37/44), 96.7% (59/61), and 91.8% (45/49) for PSAs of <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1.0 to <2.0, 2.0 to <5.0, and ≥5.0 ng/mL, respectively. Patients with lesions confined to the pelvis had lower PSAs than those with distant sites (1.6 ± 3.5 vs. 3.0 ± 6.3 ng/mL, P < 0.001). In patients treated with prostatectomy (n = 195), 24.1% (47/195) had a negative scan result, 46.1% (90/195) showed intrapelvic disease, and 29.7% (58/195) showed extrapelvic disease. In the postradiation subgroup (n = 50), 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT was always negative at a PSA lower than 1.0 ng/mL and extrapelvic disease was seen only when PSA was greater than 2.0 ng/mL. At multivariate analysis, PSA and PSAdt were independent predictive factors of scan positivity and the presence of extrapelvic disease in postsurgical patients, with area under the curve of 78% and 76%, respectively. PSA and PSAdt were independent predictors of the presence of extrapelvic disease in the postradiation cohort, with area under the curve of 85%. Time from treatment to scan was significantly longer for prostatectomy-bed-only recurrences than for those with bone or visceral disease (6.2 ± 6.4 vs. 2.4 ± 1.3 y, P < 0.001). Conclusion:18F-DCFPyL PET/CT offers high detection rates in BCR PCa patients. PSA and PSAdt are able to predict scan positivity and disease location. Furthermore, the presence of bone or visceral lesions is associated with shorter intervals from treatment than are prostate-bed-only recurrences. These tools might guide clinicians to select the most suitable candidates for 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Steven P. Rowe
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Joanna H. Shih
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Aloyse Fourquet
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Frank I. Lin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Stephen Adler
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, Maryland
| | - Philip Eclarinal
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yolanda L. McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah E. Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - William Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bradford J. Wood
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Richard Chang
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Elliot Levy
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maria Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Michael A. Gorin
- James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Martin G. Pomper
- Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Peter A. Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; and
| | - Janet F. Eary
- Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kenneth J. Pienta
- James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Lu M, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Seidel J, Ton A, McKinney Y, Eclarinal P, Merino M, Pinto P, Choyke P, Adler S. A Pilot Study of Dynamic 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Imaging of Prostate Adenocarcinoma in High-Risk Primary Prostate Cancer Patients. Mol Imaging Biol 2022; 24:444-452. [PMID: 34724140 PMCID: PMC10572101 DOI: 10.1007/s11307-021-01670-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2021] [Revised: 10/12/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The primary aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of 18F-DCFPyL, an 18F-labeled PSMA-based ligand, and to explore the utility of early time point positron emission tomography (PET) imaging extracted from PET data to distinguish malignant primary prostate from benign prostate tissue. PROCEDURES Ten consecutive patients with biopsy-proven high-risk prostate cancer underwent a dynamic 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT scan of the pelvis for the first 45 min post-injection (p.i.) followed by a static PET/CT at 2 h p.i. 18F-DCFPyL uptake values and kinetics were compared between benign prostate tissue and prostate cancer, including quantitative pharmacokinetic PET parameters extracted from 18F-DCFPyL time activity curves generated from dynamic data using a two-tissue compartment model and Patlak plots. RESULTS 18F-DCFPyL uptake values were significantly higher in primary prostate tumors than those in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and normal prostate tissue at 5 min, 30 min, and 120 min p.i. (P = 0.0002), when examining both SUVmax and SUVmean values. The two-tissue compartment model found an overall influx value (Ki) of 0.063 in primary prostate cancer, demonstrating a Ki over 15-fold higher in malignant prostate tissue compared with BPH (Ki = 0.004) and normal prostate tissue (Ki = 0.005) (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION High-risk primary prostate cancer is readily identified on dynamic and static, delayed, 18F-DCFPyL PET images. The tumor-to-background ratio increases over time, with optimal 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging at 120 min p.i. for evaluation of prostate cancer, but not necessarily ideal for clinical application. Primary prostate cancer demonstrates different uptake kinetics in comparison to BPH and normal prostate tissue. The 15-fold difference in Ki between prostate cancer and non-cancer (BPH and normal) tissues translates to an ability to distinguish prostate cancer from normal tissue at time points as early as 5 to 10 min p.i.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Lu
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jurgen Seidel
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, USA
| | - Anita Ton
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Yolanda McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Philip Eclarinal
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Maria Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Stephen Adler
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Atiq MO, Gandhy SU, Karzai F, Al Harthy M, Chen G, Bilusic M, VanderWeele DJ, Chandran EBA, Cordes LM, Owens H, Couvillon A, Hankin A, Williams M, Figg WD, Choyke PL, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Dahut WL, Gulley JL, Madan RA. PSMA PET findings in patients with undetectable PSA more than 3 years after docetaxel for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.e17046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e17046 Background: Multiple treatment options combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) provide a survival advantage in mCSPC. In this prospective study, mCSPC patients were treated with docetaxel and Prostvac, a therapeutic cancer vaccine. Since initiation of the study, a phase 3 trial of Prostvac did not show independent clinical activity in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Still, this study offers a chance to evaluate responses to docetaxel-based therapy in mCSPC. More specifically, with FDA approval of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET imaging in just the last year, there is a paucity of data regarding the use of this scan in long-term responders to therapies for mCSPC. Methods: Eligible patients included those with mCSPC and ECOG PS of ≤ 2. As per the CHAARTED regimen, patients started docetaxel within 4 months of initiating ADT with a plan to receive 75mg/m2 for 6 cycles. Patients were randomized to receive Prostvac prior to, concurrent with, or after docetaxel. Restaging was done annually with CT and Tc99 bone scan. The study was powered to evaluate immune responses, which is being reported separately. For this analysis, patients were evaluated as one group. Ten patients are in follow up with continued PSA values of ≤ 0.2 ng/mL and 7/10 were evaluated with 18F-DCFPyL PSMA PET. Results: Seventy-three patients enrolled. Median age was 63 years with a range of 41-86 years. Race distribution was 71.6% White, 20.3% Black, 4.1% other, and 4.1% unknown. Gleason 6, 7, and 8 to 10 was 4.1%, 21.6%, and 68.9% of patients, respectively, with 5.4% being unknown. Median pre-ADT PSA was 34.75 ng/mL. Low-volume disease represented 41.1% of patients and high-volume was 58.9%. After 2 years from the start of ADT, 22% of patients had PSA values of ≤ 0.2 ng/mL. This included 37% of the low-volume group and 12% of the high-volume group. Three years from starting ADT, 14% of patients had PSA values ≤ 0.2 ng/mL (20% of the low-volume group, 9% of the high-volume group). Of the 7 patients who remain in follow-up with PSA values ≤ 0.2 ng/mL and who were evaluated with PSMA PET, median time from start of ADT was 4 years with a range of 3.5-6 years. These patients either had no evidence of disease or minimal residual findings on CT/Tc99 bone scan. Four of the 7 patients still had residual areas of uptake on PSMA PET. Conclusions: Patients treated with docetaxel for mCSPC have the potential for long-term clinical responses. In these long-term responders, despite prolonged PSA response and minimal findings on conventional CT and Tc99 scans, more than half of patients still had findings on PSMA PET imaging. Further studies are required to better understand the clinical implications of these findings and the role of PSMA PET in mCSPC. Clinical trial information: NCT02649855.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad O. Atiq
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Fatima Karzai
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Munjid Al Harthy
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Gang Chen
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Marijo Bilusic
- National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | | | - Lisa M. Cordes
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Helen Owens
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Anna Couvillon
- National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Amy Hankin
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Monique Williams
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - William Douglas Figg
- Clinical Pharmacology Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - William L. Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - James L. Gulley
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Ravi Amrit Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Salerno KE, Turkbey B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Schott EE, Brennan AK, Roy S, Shankavaram U, Patel K, Cooley-Zgela T, McKinney Y, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke P, Citrin DE. Detection of failure patterns using advanced imaging in patients with biochemical recurrence following low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Brachytherapy 2022; 21:442-450. [PMID: 35523680 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2022.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2021] [Revised: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S) This study describes the pattern of failure in patients with biochemical (BCR) recurrence after low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy as a component of definitive treatment for prostate cancer. METHODS Patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were enrolled on prospective IRB approved advanced imaging protocols. Patients underwent 3T multiparametric MRI (mpMRI); a subset underwent prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-based PET/CT. Pathologic confirmation was obtained unless contraindicated. RESULTS Between January 2011 and April 2021, 51 patients with BCR after brachytherapy (n = 36) or brachytherapy + EBRT (n = 15) underwent mpMRI and were included in this analysis. Of 38 patients with available dosimetry, only two had D90<90%. The prostate and seminal vesicles were a site of failure in 66.7% (n = 34) and 39.2% (n = 20), respectively. PET/CT (n = 32 patients) more often identified lesions pelvic lymph nodes (50%; n = 16) and distant metastases (18.8%; n = 6), than mpMRI. Isolated nodal disease (9.8%; n = 5) and distant metastases (n = 1) without local recurrence were uncommon. Recurrence within the prostate was located in the transition zone in 48.5%, central or midline in 45.5%, and anterior in 36.4% of patients. CONCLUSION In this cohort of patients with BCR after LDR brachytherapy ± EBRT, the predominant recurrence pattern was local (prostate ± seminal vesicles) with frequent occurrence in the anterior prostate and transition zone. mpMRI and PSMA PET/CT provided complementary information to localize sites of recurrence, with PSMA PET/CT often confirming mpMRI findings and identifying occult nodal or distant metastases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kilian E Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Erica E Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Alexandra K Brennan
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - Uma Shankavaram
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Krishnan Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Yolanda McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, NIH Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Citrin DE, Schott E, Salerno K, Ning H, Pinto PA, Wood BJ, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B. Successful Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Postbrachytherapy Prostate Recurrence and Penile Bulb Metastasis. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100860. [PMID: 35647400 PMCID: PMC9133405 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100860] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah E. Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter A. Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | | | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Abstract
Imaging of prostate cancer is rapidly evolving with the introduction of the novel prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET imaging tool for managing recurrent prostate cancer. One immediate impact of PSMA PET is the identification of residual or recurrent lesions that are amenable to external beam radiotherapy. Radiotherapy is used as a definitive curative treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer alone or in combination therapy. In the setting of biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy, salvage radiation is a potential curative option, and the application of metastasis-directed radiotherapy in the setting of oligometastatic prostate cancer is currently being studied. To maximize the chances of curative therapy, the irradiated tumor volumes should completely encompass the actual extent of disease. Thus, an accurate estimation of the location and delineation of disease targets is critical for radiotherapy planning. The integration of PSMA PET imaging into the routine evaluation of prostate cancer has markedly improved sensitivity and specificity for recurrent disease, even at very low PSA values, which may enable further tailored radiation treatment plans, and help reduce the risk of radiation to adjacent normal tissues. However, while the introduction of PSMA PET will likely change behavior regarding earlier application of radiotherapy, the long-term impact of PSMA PET on patient outcomes is yet to be determined. The aim of the review is to give an overview of the use of PSMA-PET/CT imaging in the setting of radiation therapy for prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Simon NI, Lei K, Verdini NP, Lin J, Vega A, Niglio SA, Mortazavi A, Pal SK, Kempf J, Becker M, Knopp MV, Wright C, Jung A, Choyke PL, Steinberg SM, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Apolo AB. The association of FDG PET/CT and NaF PET/CT with survival outcomes in patients (pts) with metastatic genitourinary malignancies (mGU) treated with cabozantinib + nivolumab +/- ipilimumab (CaboNivo +/- Ipi). J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.6_suppl.452] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
452 Background: This study determined the association of functional imaging parameters obtained on FDG PET/CT and NaF PET/CT with OS for pts with mGU malignancies treated on a phase I study with CaboNivo +/- Ipi. Methods: Pts on this phase I study underwent sequential (1-hour apart) FDG PET/CT and NaF PET/CT imaging at baseline and at first-restaging (8 weeks follow up). Scan semi-quantitative parameters measures included: maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) for FDG and MTV for NaF. Total lesion number was captured for all scans. The association of imaging parameters and survival was determined with Kaplan-Meier curves. Baseline values and percent change values were calculated. Results: 81 pts were included in the analysis. 67 (83%) were males; Median age was 63 (range 25-86); Histologically, 30 pts had urothelial carcinoma, 15 clear cell renal cell carcinoma, 9 germ cell tumors, 8 urachal/adenocarcinoma, 8 prostate cancer, 3 penile cancer, 3 squamous cell carcinoma, 3 renal medullary carcinoma, and 2 small cell (1 bladder, 1 prostate). All 81 had a baseline FDG PET scan, 78 pts received baseline NaF PET scans; 66 received both FDG PET and NaF PET baseline and follow up scans. 957 total lesions were detected on FDG PET across all histologies, 87 liver (9%), 252 lung (26%), 152 bone (16%), 411 lymph node (43%), and 55 other visceral metastases (6%). 414 total lesions were detected on NaF imaging. Low vs high baseline FDG MTV (31 vs 11 months, p = 0.0002), TLG (30 vs 11 months, p = 0.0004), Lesion number (49 vs 15 months, p = 0.0005), and SUVmax (25 vs 12 months, p = 0.025), FDG lesion number decrease or no change vs increase (24 vs 12 months, p = 0.0068), and low vs high baseline NaF MTV (26 vs 16 months, p = 0.007), and lesion number (26 vs 16 months, p = 0.007) showed the strongest associations with OS. A multivariable Cox analysis demonstrated that baseline FDG MTV (HR = 2.87, 95% CI 1.62-5.08, p = 0.0003) and FDG lesion number percent change (HR = 2.71, 95% CI 1.40-5.24, p = 0.0031) were jointly associated with OS. Conclusions: Baseline functional imaging parameters and percent change seen on follow imaging with FDG PET and NaF PET are prognostic in mGU pts treated with CaboNivo +/- ipi. Additional parameters and histologic subsets will be presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Jeffrey Lin
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | | | - Amir Mortazavi
- Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Sumanta K. Pal
- Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA
| | - Jeffrey Kempf
- Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Newark, NJ
| | - Murray Becker
- Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Newark, NJ
| | - Michael V. Knopp
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Chadwick Wright
- Division of Molecular Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Andrea B. Apolo
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Mena E, Turkbey EB, Lindenberg L. Modern radiographic imaging in multiple myeloma, what is the minimum requirement? Semin Oncol 2022; 49:86-93. [PMID: 35190200 PMCID: PMC9149049 DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2022.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2020] [Accepted: 01/09/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Imaging innovations offer useful techniques applicable to many oncology specialties. Treatment advances in the field of multiple myeloma (MM) have increased the need for accurate diagnosis, particularly in the bone marrow, which is an essential component in myeloma-defining criteria. Modern imaging identifies osteolytic lesions, distinguishes solitary plasmacytoma from MM, and evaluates the presence of extramedullary disease. Furthermore, imaging is increasingly valuable in post-treatment response assessment. Detection of minimal residual disease after therapy carries prognostic implications and influences subsequent treatment planning. Whole-body low-dose Computed Tomography is now recommended over the conventional skeletal survey, and more sophisticated functional imaging methods, such as 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography , and diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging are proving effective in the assessment and monitoring of MM disease. This review focuses on understanding indications and advantages of these imaging modalities for diagnosing and managing myeloma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch. National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Evrim B. Turkbey
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch. National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Griffiths GL, Vasquez C, Escorcia F, Clanton J, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke PL. Translating a radiolabeled imaging agent to the clinic. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2022; 181:114086. [PMID: 34942275 PMCID: PMC8889912 DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2021.114086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
Molecular Imaging is entering the most fruitful, exciting period in its history with many new agents under development, and several reaching the clinic in recent years. While it is unusual for just one laboratory to take an agent from initial discovery through to full clinical approval the steps along the way are important to understand for all interested participants even if one is not involved in the entire process. Here, we provide an overview of these processes beginning at discovery and preclinical validation of a new molecular imaging agent and using as an exemplar a low molecular weight disease-specific targeted positron emission tomography (PET) agent. Compared to standard drug development requirements, molecular imaging agents may benefit from a regulatory standpoint from their low mass administered doses, they nonetheless still need to go through a series of well-defined steps before they can be considered for Phase 1 human testing. After outlining the discovery and preclinical validation approaches, we will also discuss the nuances of Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 studies that may culminate in an FDA general use approval. Finally, some post-approval aspects of novel molecular imaging agents are considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary L. Griffiths
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research, Frederick, MD
| | - Crystal Vasquez
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Freddy Escorcia
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Salerno K, Turkbey B, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Schott E, Brennan A, Patel K, Zgela TC, McKinney Y, Wood B, Pinto P, Choyke P, Citrin D. Detection of Failure Patterns Using Advanced Imaging in Patients With Biochemical Recurrence Following Low Dose Rate Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
28
|
Kazandjian D, Hill E, Dew A, Morrison C, Roswarski J, Korde N, Emanuel M, Petrosyan A, Bhutani M, Calvo KR, Dulau-Florea A, Kwok M, Lee MJ, Lee S, Lindenberg L, Mailankody S, Manasanch E, Maric I, Mena E, Patel N, Tageja N, Trepel JB, Turkbey B, Wang HW, Wang W, Yuan C, Zhang Y, Braylan R, Choyke P, Stetler-Stevenson M, Steinberg SM, Figg WD, Roschewski M, Landgren O. Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone Followed by Lenalidomide Maintenance for Prevention of Symptomatic Multiple Myeloma in Patients With High-risk Smoldering Myeloma: A Phase 2 Nonrandomized Controlled Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7:1678-1685. [PMID: 34529025 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance High-risk smoldering myeloma has a 5-year risk of progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma of approximately 75%. Treatment with lenalidomide decreases the risk of progression; however, novel triplet regimens are superior, and earlier disease may be more treatment sensitive. Objective To evaluate the use of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) with lenalidomide maintenance therapy as early intervention in high-risk smoldering myeloma and to determine the rates of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete response (CR). Design, Setting, and Participants In this single-arm, single-center, phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial, responses were evaluated at every cycle during KRd treatment and every 3 cycles subsequently. Bone marrow biopsies and imaging were performed by cycle 8 and then annually. The study enrolled patients from May 29, 2012, to July 23, 2020, at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, a highly specialized tertiary cancer center. Patient key eligibility criteria included a diagnosis of high-risk smoldering myeloma based on the Mayo Clinic, Spanish, and/or Rajkumar, Mateos, and Landgren criteria. Interventions Patients received eight 4-week cycles of intravenous carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 (first 2 doses, 20 mg/m2), dexamethasone (20 mg, cycles 1-4; 10 mg, cycles 5-8 twice weekly), and lenalidomide 25 mg (days 1-21) followed by twenty-four 28-day cycles of maintenance lenalidomide 10 mg (days 1-21). Stem cell harvest and storage were optional. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the MRD-negative CR rate. Key secondary outcomes included duration of MRD-negative CR and progression to multiple myeloma. Results A total of 54 patients (median age, 59 years [range, 40-79 years]; 30 men [55.6%]; and 2 Asian [3.7%], 15 Black [27.8%], 1 Hispanic [1.9%], and 36 White [66.7%] patients) were enrolled, with a median potential follow-up time of 31.9 months (range, 6.7-102.9 months). The MRD-negative CR rate was 70.4% (95% CI, 56.4%-82.0%), with a median sustained duration of 5.5 years (95% CI, 3.7 years to not estimable). The 8-year probability of being free from progression to multiple myeloma was 91.2% (95% CI, 67.4%-97.9%), and no deaths occurred. Nonhematologic grade 3 adverse events occurred in 21 patients (38.9%) and included thromboembolism, rash, and lung infection, with no grade 4 events. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that treatment of high-risk smoldering myeloma with novel triplet regimens, such as KRd and lenalidomide maintenance therapy, may alter the natural history of smoldering myeloma by significantly delaying development of end-organ disease. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm this favorable benefit-to-risk profile. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01572480.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Multiple Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Elizabeth Hill
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Alexander Dew
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Candis Morrison
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Joseph Roswarski
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Neha Korde
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Myeloma Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Michael Emanuel
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ani Petrosyan
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Manisha Bhutani
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Katherine R Calvo
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Alina Dulau-Florea
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mary Kwok
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Division of Hematology, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Min-Jung Lee
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sunmin Lee
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sham Mailankody
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Myeloma Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Elisabet Manasanch
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Irina Maric
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nisha Patel
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nishant Tageja
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Jane B Trepel
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Hao-Wei Wang
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Weixin Wang
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Constance Yuan
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yong Zhang
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Raul Braylan
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maryalice Stetler-Stevenson
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Seth M Steinberg
- Biostatistics & Data Management Section, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - William D Figg
- Molecular Pharmacology Section, Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mark Roschewski
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ola Landgren
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Multiple Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Fourquet A, Rosenberg A, Mena E, Shih JJ, Turkbey B, Blain M, Bergvall E, Lin FI, Adler S, Lim I, Madan RA, Karzai F, Gulley JL, Dahut WL, Wood BJ, Chang R, Levy E, Choyke PL, Lindenberg L. A comparison of 18F-DCFPyL, 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG PET/CT in a prospective cohort of men with metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2021; 63:735-741. [PMID: 34475237 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 08/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: 18F-DCFPyL, 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG PET/CT were compared in a prospective cohort of men with metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). Materials and Methods: 67 men (Group 1) with documented metastatic PCa underwent 18F-DCFPyL and 18F-NaF PET/CT and a subgroup of 30 men (Group 2) underwent additional imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT. The tracers were compared for their detection rates, imaging concordance, associations with Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA), treatment at the time of imaging and castration status. Results: Overall, 61 men had metastatic disease detected on one or more scans, while 6 men were negative. In Group 1, 18F-NaF detected significantly more metastatic lesions than 18F-DCFPyL (median of 3 lesions versus 2, P = 0.001) even after eliminating benign causes of 18F-NaF uptake. This difference was particularly clear for men receiving treatment (P = 0.005) or who were castrate resistant (P = 0.014). The median percentage of bone lesions that were concordant on 18F-DCFPyL and 18F-NaF was 50%. In Group 2, 18F-DCFPyL detected more lesions than 18F-FDG (median of 5 lesions versus 2, P = 0.0003), regardless of PSA level, castration status or treatment. The median percentage of lesions that were concordant on 18F-DCFPyL and 18F-FDG was 22.2%. This percentage was slightly higher for castrate-resistant than castrate-sensitive men (P = 0.048). Conclusion: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is the most versatile of the three PET agents for metastatic PCa however, 18F-NaF detects more bone metastases. Imaging reveals substantial tumor heterogeneity with only 50% concordance between 18F-DCFPyL and 18F-NaF and 22% concordance for 18F-DCFPyL and 18F-FDG. This indicates considerable phenotypic differences among metastatic lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Joanna J Shih
- Division of Cancer treatment and Diagnosis : Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Maxime Blain
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Ethan Bergvall
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Frank I Lin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Stephen Adler
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research
| | - Ilhan Lim
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Fatima Karzai
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - James L Gulley
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - William L Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Richard Chang
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Elliot Levy
- Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- 1.Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH 2 .F. Edward Hebert School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, United States
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Masoudi S, Mehralivand S, Harmon SA, Lay N, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Pinto PA, Citrin DE, Gulley JL, Wood BJ, Dahut WL, Madan RA, Bagci U, Choyke PL, Turkbey B. Deep Learning Based Staging of Bone Lesions From Computed Tomography Scans. IEEE Access 2021; 9:87531-87542. [PMID: 34733603 PMCID: PMC8562651 DOI: 10.1109/access.2021.3074051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
In this study, we formulated an efficient deep learning-based classification strategy for characterizing metastatic bone lesions using computed tomography scans (CTs) of prostate cancer patients. For this purpose, 2,880 annotated bone lesions from CT scans of 114 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer were used for training, validation, and final evaluation. These annotations were in the form of lesion full segmentation, lesion type and labels of either benign or malignant. In this work, we present our approach in developing the state-of-the-art model to classify bone lesions as benign or malignant, where (1) we introduce a valuable dataset to address a clinically important problem, (2) we increase the reliability of our model by patient-level stratification of our dataset following lesion-aware distribution at each of the training, validation, and test splits, (3) we explore the impact of lesion texture, morphology, size, location, and volumetric information on the classification performance, (4) we investigate the functionality of lesion classification using different algorithms including lesion-based average 2D ResNet-50, lesion-based average 2D ResNeXt-50, 3D ResNet-18, 3D ResNet-50, as well as the ensemble of 2D ResNet-50 and 3D ResNet-18. For this purpose, we employed a train/validation/test split equal to 75%/12%/13% with several data augmentation methods applied to the training dataset to avoid overfitting and to increase reliability. We achieved an accuracy of 92.2% for correct classification of benign vs. malignant bone lesions in the test set using an ensemble of lesion-based average 2D ResNet-50 and 3D ResNet-18 with texture, volumetric information, and morphology having the greatest discriminative power respectively. To the best of our knowledge, this is the highest ever achieved lesion-level accuracy having a very comprehensive data set for such a clinically important problem. This level of classification performance in the early stages of metastasis development bodes well for clinical translation of this strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samira Masoudi
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Sherif Mehralivand
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Nathan Lay
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - James L Gulley
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - William L Dahut
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Ravi A Madan
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Ulas Bagci
- Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Kazandjian D, Dew A, Hill E, Ramirez EG, Morrison C, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Yuan C, Maric I, Wang HW, Calvo K, Dulau-Florea A, Roswarski J, Emanuel M, Braylan R, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Camphausen K, Stetler-Stevenson M, Steinberg SM, Figg WD, C Jones J. Avelumab, a PD-L1 Inhibitor, in Combination with Hypofractionated Radiotherapy and the Abscopal Effect in Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma. Oncologist 2021; 26:288-e541. [PMID: 33554406 PMCID: PMC8018315 DOI: 10.1002/onco.13712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2021] [Accepted: 02/01/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Lessons Learned Despite the initial optimism for using immune checkpoint inhibition in the treatment of multiple myeloma, subsequent clinical studies have been disappointing. Preclinical studies have suggested that priming the immune system with various modalities in addition to checkpoint inhibition may overcome the relative T‐cell exhaustion or senescence; however, in this small data set, radiotherapy with checkpoint inhibition did not appear to activate the antitumor immune response.
Background Extramedullary disease (EMD) is recognized as an aggressive subentity of multiple myeloma (MM) with a need for novel therapeutic approaches. We therefore designed a proof‐of‐principle pilot study to evaluate the synergy between the combination of the anti–PD‐L1, avelumab, and concomitant hypofractionated radiotherapy. Methods This was a single‐arm phase II Simon two‐stage single center study that was prematurely terminated because of the COVID‐19 pandemic after enrolling four patients. Key eligibility included patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had exhausted or were not candidates for standard therapy and had at least one lesion amenable to radiotherapy. Patients received avelumab until progression or intolerable toxicity and hypofractionated radiotherapy to a focal lesion in cycle 2. Radiotherapy was delayed until cycle 2 to allow the avelumab to reach a study state, given the important observation from previous studies that concomitant therapy is needed for the abscopal effect. Results At a median potential follow‐up of 10.5 months, there were no objective responses, one minimal response, and two stable disease as best response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.5–7.1 months), and no deaths occurred. There were no grade ≥3 and five grade 1–2 treatment‐related adverse events. Conclusion Avelumab in combination with radiotherapy for patients with RRMM and EMD was associated with very modest systemic clinical benefit; however, patients did benefit as usual from local radiotherapy. Furthermore, the combination was very well tolerated compared with historical RRMM treatment regimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Alexander Dew
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Elizabeth Hill
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Elizabeth Gil Ramirez
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Candis Morrison
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Constance Yuan
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Irina Maric
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Hao-Wei Wang
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Katherine Calvo
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Alina Dulau-Florea
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Joseph Roswarski
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Michael Emanuel
- Office Research Nursing, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Raul Braylan
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Kevin Camphausen
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Maryalice Stetler-Stevenson
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Seth M Steinberg
- Biostatistics & Data Management Section, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - William D Figg
- Molecular Pharmacology Section, Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Jennifer C Jones
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Takebe N, Coyne GO, Kummar S, Collins J, Reid JM, Piekarz R, Moore N, Juwara L, Johnson BC, Bishop R, Lin FI, Mena E, Choyke PL, Lindenberg ML, Rubinstein LV, Bonilla CM, Goetz MP, Ames MM, McGovern RM, Streicher H, Covey JM, Doroshow JH, Chen AP. Phase 1 study of Z-endoxifen in patients with advanced gynecologic, desmoid, and hormone receptor-positive solid tumors. Oncotarget 2021; 12:268-277. [PMID: 33659039 PMCID: PMC7899551 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.27887] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2020] [Accepted: 01/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Differential responses to tamoxifen may be due to inter-patient variability in tamoxifen metabolism into pharmacologically active Z-endoxifen. Z-endoxifen administration was anticipated to bypass these variations, increasing active drug levels, and potentially benefitting patients responding sub-optimally to tamoxifen. Materials and Methods: Patients with treatment-refractory gynecologic malignancies, desmoid tumors, or hormone receptor-positive solid tumors took oral Z-endoxifen daily with a 3+3 phase 1 dose escalation format over 8 dose levels (DLs). Safety, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results: Thirty-four of 40 patients were evaluable. No maximum tolerated dose was established. DL8, 360 mg/day, was used for the expansion phase and is higher than doses administered in any previous study; it also yielded higher plasma Z-endoxifen concentrations. Three patients had partial responses and 8 had prolonged stable disease (≥ 6 cycles); 44.4% (8/18) of patients at dose levels 6–8 achieved one of these outcomes. Six patients who progressed after tamoxifen therapy experienced partial response or stable disease for ≥ 6 cycles with Z-endoxifen; one with desmoid tumor remains on study after 62 cycles (nearly 5 years). Conclusions: Evidence of antitumor activity and prolonged stable disease are achieved with Z-endoxifen despite prior tamoxifen therapy, supporting further study of Z-endoxifen, particularly in patients with desmoid tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naoko Takebe
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | | | - Shivaani Kummar
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.,Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA
| | - Jerry Collins
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Joel M Reid
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Richard Piekarz
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Nancy Moore
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Lamin Juwara
- Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD 21702, USA
| | - Barry C Johnson
- Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD 21702, USA
| | - Rachel Bishop
- Consult Services Section, National Eye Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Frank I Lin
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - M Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Larry V Rubinstein
- Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | | | - Matthew P Goetz
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Matthew M Ames
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | | | - Howard Streicher
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Joseph M Covey
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - James H Doroshow
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.,Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Alice P Chen
- Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Rowe LS, Harmon S, Horn A, Shankavaram U, Roy S, Ning H, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Citrin DE, Choyke P, Turkbey B. Pattern of failure in prostate cancer previously treated with radical prostatectomy and post-operative radiotherapy: a secondary analysis of two prospective studies using novel molecular imaging techniques. Radiat Oncol 2021; 16:32. [PMID: 33568190 PMCID: PMC7874470 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01733-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2020] [Accepted: 12/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Prostate Membrane Specific Antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) have shown high accuracy in identifying recurrent lesions after definitive treatment in prostate cancer (PCa). In this study, we aimed to outline patterns of failure in a group of post-prostatectomy patients who received adjuvant or salvage radiation therapy (PORT) and subsequently experienced biochemical recurrence, using 18F-PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI. Methods PCa patients with biochemical failure post-prostatectomy, and no evident site of recurrence on conventional imaging, were enrolled on two prospective trials of first and second generation 18F-PSMA PET agents (18F-DCFBC and 18F-DCFPyL) in combination with MRI between October 2014 and December 2018. The primary aim of our study is to characterize these lesions with respect to their location relative to previous PORT field and received dose. Results A total of 34 participants underwent 18F-PSMA PET imaging for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and PORT, with 32/34 found to have 18F-PSMA avid lesions. On 18F-PSMA, 17/32 patients (53.1%) had metastatic disease, 8/32 (25.0%) patients had locoregional recurrences, and 7/32 (21.9%) had local failure in the prostate fossa. On further exploration, we noted 6/7 (86%) of prostate fossa recurrences were in-field and were encompassed by 100% isodose lines, receiving 64.8–72 Gy. One patient had marginal failure encompassed by the 49 Gy isodose. Conclusions 18F-PSMA PET imaging demonstrates promise in identifying occult PCa recurrence after PORT. Although distant recurrence was the predominant pattern of failure, in-field recurrence was noted in approximately 1/5th of patients. This should be considered in tailoring radiotherapy practice after prostatectomy. Trial registrationwww.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02190279 and NCT03181867. Registered July 12, 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02190279 and June 8 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03181867.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay S Rowe
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B2-3500, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. .,Department of Radiation Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, 11560 University Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6G 1Z2, Canada.
| | - Stephanie Harmon
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Adam Horn
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, 8901 Rockville Pike, USA
| | - Uma Shankavaram
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room 1002, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Soumyajit Roy
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B2-3500, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B2-3500, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B2-3500, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Drive Magnuson Clinical Center, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Hill E, Mena E, Morrison C, Dew A, Choyke P, Lindenberg L, Kazandjian D. Diagnostic performance of 18 F-FDG-PET/CT compared to standard skeletal survey for detecting bone destruction in smouldering multiple myeloma: time to move forward. Br J Haematol 2020; 193:125-128. [PMID: 32966607 DOI: 10.1111/bjh.17088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2020] [Revised: 08/13/2020] [Accepted: 08/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Skeletal survey (SS) continues to be used in the community to detect bone disease in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While the false-negative rate is high, the specificity of SS is less well characterised. Here, we compare the diagnostic accuracy of SS compared to 18 F-FDG-PET/CT (positron emission tomography/computed tomography) in 79 patients referred to our tertiary centre with a diagnosis of smouldering MM. SS had a specificity of 83·1% (95% confidence interval: 72·0-90·5%). This study reinforces the importance of using more specific imaging techniques to avoid inaccurate diagnosis that could lead to the risks associated with unnecessary therapy in patients with smouldering MM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Hill
- Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Multiple Myeloma Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Candis Morrison
- Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Multiple Myeloma Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Alexander Dew
- Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Multiple Myeloma Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Dickran Kazandjian
- Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, Multiple Myeloma Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Merz S, Jaehn P, Mena E, Pöge K, Strasser S, Saß AC, Rommel A, Bolte G, Holmberg C. Why should gender-sensitive health reports be intersectional? Eur J Public Health 2020. [DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
A key focus of both epidemiology and PHMR is the identification of health inequity between population groups and its determinants. However, scholars in the social sciences have criticised prevalent approaches of describing health differences according to single social categories like sex/gender or race/ethnicity, glossing over significant heterogeneity within and relations between presumed population groups. Applying these critiques to the field of PHMR, we would argue that intersectionality scholarship offers vital impulses for the study of health inequity by focusing on several, interrelated social categories and emphasising the structural determinants affecting unique population subgroups differently.
Methods
We mapped existing approaches to describing population differences in health. We also conducted a literature review on intersectionality scholarship in public health and then synthesised results to develop a conceptual framework for deploying intersectionality to epidemiology and PHMR.
Findings
We identified four key principles through which the reporting on subgroup differences could be strengthened: addressing the internal heterogeneity of population groups; contextualising inequities and focusing on societal power relations rather than individual characteristics; deploying novel multivariable modelling approaches in data analysis; and aiming towards the empowerment of population groups rather than deploying deficit-oriented and paternalistic models.
Discussion
To be discussed are the unique contributions of intersectionality to PHMR compared to other approaches, for example from social epidemiology or medical anthropology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Merz
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - P Jaehn
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - E Mena
- University of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Bremen, Germany
- University of Bremen, Health Sciences Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - K Pöge
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - S Strasser
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - A C Saß
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - A Rommel
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - G Bolte
- University of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Bremen, Germany
- University of Bremen, Health Sciences Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - C Holmberg
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Mena E, Jaehn P, Merz S, Pöge K, Strasser S, Saß AC, Rommel A, Holmberg C, Bolte G. Suggestions for a gender-sensitive and intersectional practice of health monitoring and reporting. Eur J Public Health 2020. [DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.621] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Health reports summarize the evidence basis on disease burden and its causes and are intended to inform decisions of policy makers. By focusing on health needs of social groupings according to sex/gender or race/ethnicity, PHMR crucially contributes to achieving health equity. In order to realise its aims, PHMR relies on the availability of high-quality data, appropriate analysis methods and intuitive presentation of results.
Methods
The joint project AdvanceGender used mixed methods to translate principles of intersectionality into new methods for recruitment, data analysis and health reporting. A review of descriptions of representativeness in epidemiological studies was conducted to investigate how an intersectional perspective can inform recruitment. To evaluate intersectional and gender-sensitive data analysis, we reviewed and applied recently developed methods such as classification and regression tree analysis (CART) and multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA).
Findings
An intersectional perspective on representativeness unravelled that study participation of women and men might be differential according to further social categories such as civil status or educational level. CART analysis might help to identify intersectional groupings differing in health behaviours or outcomes by exploring a multitude of social dimensions without facing the risk of stereotyping with predefined categories. MAIHDA depicts an alternative method that is suited for descriptive analyses of health-related outcomes among intersectional strata. In contrast to analysing supposedly static features such as sex, a focus on solution-linked variables like social support might be a fertile ground to identify areas for public health action.
Discussion
Principles of intersectionality open up new perspectives for recruitment and data analysis that might be fruitful for population health research and ultimately for PHMR.
Greta Bauer
Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada
Contact: gbauer@uwo.ca
Olena Hankivsky
University of Melbourne, Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne, Australia Institute for Intersectionality Research, School of Public Policy, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
Contact: o.hankivsky@unimelb.edu.au
Nicole Rosenkötter
NRW Centre for Health, Division of Health Reporting, Bielefeld, Germany
Contact: Nicole.Rosenkoetter@lzg.nrw.de
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Mena
- University of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Bremen, Germany
- University of Bremen, Health Sciences Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - P Jaehn
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - S Merz
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - K Pöge
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - S Strasser
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - A C Saß
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - A Rommel
- Robert Koch-Institute, Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Berlin, Germany
| | - C Holmberg
- Brandenburg Medical School, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - G Bolte
- University of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Bremen, Germany
- University of Bremen, Health Sciences Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Chaurasia AR, Smith CP, Pinto P, Wood B, Schott E, Cooley-Zgela T, Madan R, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Citrin D, Turkbey B. Local failure after definitive radiation treatment of lymph-node positive prostate cancer: supporting the use of novel imaging techniques to personalize treatment options. BJR Case Rep 2020; 6:20200001. [PMID: 32922840 PMCID: PMC7465745 DOI: 10.1259/bjrcr.20200001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2019] [Revised: 03/11/2020] [Accepted: 04/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with lymph-node positive prostate cancer are often treated with external beam radiotherapy with androgen deprivation therapy1, but are expected to have a high rate of biochemical failure. Recently, MRI and molecular imaging have afforded the opportunity to elucidate otherwise occult sites of recurrence after conventional imaging. We present an unusual case of local failure within the prostate after definitive radiation treatment of lymph-node positive prostate cancer, in which advanced imaging allowed for a potentially curative salvage treatment option.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Avinash R Chaurasia
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Clayton P Smith
- Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Peter Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Bradford Wood
- Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Ravi Madan
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Deborah Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Mena E, Black PC, Rais-Bahrami S, Gorin M, Allaf M, Choyke P. Novel PET imaging methods for prostate cancer. World J Urol 2020; 39:687-699. [PMID: 32671604 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03344-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Accepted: 07/02/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Prostate cancer is a common neoplasm but conventional imaging methods such as CT and bone scan are often insensitive. A new class of PET agents have emerged to diagnose and manage prostate cancer. METHODS The relevant literature on PET imaging agents for prostate cancer was reviewed. RESULTS This review shows a broad range of PET imaging agents, the most successful of which is prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET. Other agents either lack the sensitivity or specificity of PSMA PET. CONCLUSION Among the available PET agents for prostate cancer, PSMA PET has emerged as the leader. It is likely to have great impact on the diagnosis, staging and management of prostate cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Dr, Bldg 10, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1088, USA
| | - Peter C Black
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Michael Gorin
- Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Mohamad Allaf
- Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, 10 Center Dr, Bldg 10, Room B3B69F, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1088, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Lindenberg L, Mena E, Turkbey B, Shih JH, Reese SE, Harmon SA, Lim I, Lin F, Ton A, McKinney YL, Eclarinal P, Citrin DE, Dahut W, Madan R, Wood BJ, Krishnasamy V, Chang R, Levy E, Pinto P, Eary JF, Choyke PL. Evaluating Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Histologic Validation of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT with Comparison to Multiparametric MRI. Radiology 2020; 296:564-572. [PMID: 32633674 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020192018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Background Prostate cancer recurrence is found in up to 40% of men with prior definitive (total prostatectomy or whole-prostate radiation) treatment. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET agents such as 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL) may improve detection of recurrence compared with multiparametric MRI; however, histopathologic validation is lacking. Purpose To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT based on histologic analysis and to compare with pelvic multiparametric MRI in men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Men were prospectively recruited after prostatectomy and/or radiation therapy with rising prostate-specific antigen level (median, 2.27 ng/mL; range, 0.2-27.45 ng/mL) and a negative result at conventional imaging (bone scan and/or CT). Participants underwent 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging and 3.0-T pelvic multiparametric MRI. Statistical analysis included Wald and modified χ2 tests. Results A total of 323 lesions were visualized in 77 men by using 18F-DCFPyL or multiparametric MRI, with imaging detection concordance of 25% (82 of 323) when including all lesions in the MRI field of view and 53% (52 of 99) when only assessing prostate bed lesions. 18F-DCFPyL depicted more pelvic lymph nodes than did MRI (128 vs 23 nodes). Histologic validation was obtained in 80 locations with sensitivity, specificity, and PPV of 69% (25 of 36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 51%, 88%), 91% (40 of 44; 95% CI: 74%, 98%), and 86% (25 of 29; 95% CI: 73%, 97%) for 18F-DCFPyL and 69% (24 of 35; 95% CI: 50%, 86%), 74% (31 of 42; 95% CI: 42%, 89%), and 69% (24 of 35; 95% CI: 50%, 88%) for multiparametric MRI (P = .95, P = .14, and P = .07, respectively). In the prostate bed, sensitivity, specificity, and PPV were 57% (13 of 23; 95% CI: 32%, 81%), 86% (18 of 21; 95% CI: 73%, 100%), and 81% (13 of 16; 95% CI: 59%, 100%) for 18F-DCFPyL and 83% (19 of 23; 95% CI: 59%, 100%), 52% (11 of 21; 95% CI: 29%, 74%), and 66% (19 of 29; 95% CI: 44%, 86%) for multiparametric MRI (P = .19, P = .02, and P = .17, respectively). The addition of 18F-DCFPyL to multiparametric MRI improved PPV by 38% overall (P = .02) and by 30% (P = .09) in the prostate bed. Conclusion Findings with 2-(3-{1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine 3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL) were histologically validated and demonstrated high specificity and positive predictive value. In the pelvis, 18F-DCFPyL depicted more lymph nodes and improved positive predictive value and specificity when added to multiparametric MRI. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Zukotynski and Rowe in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liza Lindenberg
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Esther Mena
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Baris Turkbey
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Joanna H Shih
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Sarah E Reese
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Ilhan Lim
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Frank Lin
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Anita Ton
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Yolanda L McKinney
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Philip Eclarinal
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - William Dahut
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Ravi Madan
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Bradford J Wood
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Venkatesh Krishnasamy
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Richard Chang
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Elliot Levy
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Peter Pinto
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Janet F Eary
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| | - Peter L Choyke
- From the Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Building 10, Room B3B47A, Bethesda, MD 20892 (L.L., E.M., B.T., I.L., F.L., A.T., Y.L.M., P.E., P.L.C.); Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis: Biometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (J.H.S.); National Cancer Institute Biometrics Research Program Contract, General Dynamics Information Technology, Falls Church, Va (S.E.R.); Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (S.A.H.); Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (D.E.C.); Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (W.D., R.M.); Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (B.J.W., V.K., R.C., E.L.); Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md (P.P.); and Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md (J.F.E.)
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Abstract
Imaging plays an increasing role in prostate cancer diagnosis and staging. Accurate staging of prostate cancer is required for optimal treatment planning. In detecting extraprostatic cancer and sites of early recurrence, traditional imaging methods (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, radionuclide bone scan) have suboptimal performance. This leaves a gap between known disease recurrence as indicated by rising prostate-specific antigen and the ability to localize the recurrence on imaging. Novel positron emission tomography (PET) agents including radiolabeled choline, fluciclovine (18F-FACBC), and agents targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen are being developed and tested to increase diagnostic performance of non-invasive prostate cancer localization. When combined with CT or MRI, these tracers offer a combination of functional information and anatomic localization that is superior to conventional imaging methods. These PET radiotracers have varying mechanisms and excretion patterns affecting their pharmacokinetics and diagnostic performance, which will be reviewed in this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie M Walker
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Ilhan Lim
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences (KIRAMS), Seoul, Korea
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Hill EM, Dew A, Morrison C, Choyke PL, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Kazandjian DG. Diagnostic performance of skeletal survey versus 18F-FDG-PET/CT for detecting lytic lesions in smoldering multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2020. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.8532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
8532 Background: Per NCCN Guidelines for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), whole body radiography, i.e. skeletal survey (SS), should be used to rule out osteolytic bone lesions. If negative, more sensitive imaging techniques such as whole body 18F-FDG-PET/CT(PET/CT), MRI, or low dose CT should be used to differentiate between SMM and multiple myeloma (MM). The false-negative rate of SS is high (30-70%). The frequency of false-positive SS in SMM is less well known but important because of its common use in community practice. We examine the specificity of SS in patients with a presumed diagnosis of SMM and question if SS is still warranted prior to modern imaging techniques to confirm a diagnosis of SMM. Methods: Records of patients sequentially referred from the community and evaluated for a presumed diagnosis of SMM at the National Institutes of Health Myeloma Program between April 2010 to January 2020 were reviewed. Patients with a SS and PET/CT performed within 30 days were included. Positive findings on PET/CT were defined per the 2014 IMWG criteria as one or more sites of osteolytic bone destruction seen on CT. The sensitivity and specificity of SS were calculated using PET/CT as the reference test. Results: Charts from 144 patients with presumed SMM were reviewed. A total of 76 SMM patients had both a SS and PET/CT performed within 30 days of each other. Sixty-four patients (84.2%) showed concordant results. Twelve (15.8%) patients had discordant imaging results. SS was falsely negative in 3 (4.7% (95% CI: 1.2%-14.2%)) patients and falsely positive in 9 (69.2% (95% CI: 38.9%-89.6%)) patients. SS had a sensitivity of 57.1% (95% CI: 20.2%-88.2%) and a specificity of 86.9% (95% CI: 76.2-93.5). Conclusions: In patients presumed to have SMM, disease burden is low thus highly sensitive imaging modalities are needed to rule out bone disease. This study confirms the low sensitivity of SS in the SMM population. It more importantly points out the low specificity of SS in SMM. The IMWG no longer recommends conventional SS prior to whole body CT (or PET/CT) as first imaging choice in SMM. While the argument may be made that SS should still be used upfront due to low cost and widespread availability, this study shows the risk of overestimating disease. Over 10% of patients in this series had false positive disease on SS and thus at risk of receiving unnecessary treatment. Not only concerning for patient toxicity but more so financial toxicity. If SS is used, it is important to review positive findings directly with a radiologist and consider follow-up confirmatory imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alexander Dew
- Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Peter L. Choyke
- National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Dickran Garo Kazandjian
- Office of Hematology and Oncology Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Roldán M, Bouzas A, Seco A, Mena E, Mayor Á, Barat R. An integral approach to sludge handling in a WWTP operated for EBPR aiming phosphorus recovery: Simulation of alternatives, LCA and LCC analyses. Water Res 2020; 175:115647. [PMID: 32146206 DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2020.115647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2019] [Revised: 01/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/22/2020] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
As phosphorus is a non-renewable resource mainly used to produce fertilizers and helps to provide food all over the world, the proper management of its reserves is a global concern since it is expected to become scarcer in the near future. In this work we assessed two different sludge line configurations aiming for P extraction and recovery before anaerobic digestion and compared them with the classical configuration. This study has been performed by simulation with the model BNRM2 integrated in the software package DESASS 7.1. Configuration 1 was based on the production of a PO4-enriched stream from sludge via elutriation in the primary thickeners, while Configuration 2 was based on the WASSTRIP® process and its PO4-enriched stream was mechanically obtained with dynamic thickeners. In both alternatives recovery was enhanced by promoting poly-phosphate (poly-P) extraction under anaerobic conditions, for which both configurations were fully evaluated in a full-scale WWTP. Both were also optimized to maximize phosphorus extraction. Their costs and life cycles were also analysed. The novelty of this research lies in the lack of literature about the integral evaluation of pre-anaerobic digestion P recovery from wastewaters. This study included a holistic approach and an optimization study of both alternatives plus their economic and environmental aspects. In Configuration 1, the PO4-P load in the recovery stream reached 43.1% of the total influent P load and reduced uncontrolled P-precipitation in the sludge line up to 52.9%. In Configuration 2, extraction was 48.2% of the influent P load and it reduced precipitation by up to 60.0%. Despite Configuration 1's lower phosphorus recovery efficiency, it had a 23.0% lower life cycle cost and a 14.2% lower global warming impact per hm3 of treated influent than Configuration 2. Configuration 1 also reduced the TAEC by 17.6% and global warming impact by 2.0% less than Configuration 0.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Roldán
- CALAGUA - Unidad Mixta UV-UPV, Instituto de Ingeniería del Agua y Medio Ambiente - IIAMA, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camí de Vera s/n, 46022 València, Spain
| | - A Bouzas
- CALAGUA - Unidad Mixta UV-UPV, Departament d'Enginyeria Química, Universitat de València, Avinguda de la Universitat s/n, 46100 Burjassot, València, Spain
| | - A Seco
- CALAGUA - Unidad Mixta UV-UPV, Departament d'Enginyeria Química, Universitat de València, Avinguda de la Universitat s/n, 46100 Burjassot, València, Spain
| | - E Mena
- EMUASA, Plaza Circular, 9, 30008, Murcia, Spain
| | - Á Mayor
- Cetaqua, Water Technology Centre, Carretera d'Esplugues, 75, 08940 Cornellà de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - R Barat
- CALAGUA - Unidad Mixta UV-UPV, Instituto de Ingeniería del Agua y Medio Ambiente - IIAMA, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camí de Vera s/n, 46022 València, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Intersectionality-based gender sensitivity in multivariable analysis might advance simultaneous consideration of intersecting social positions and identities. Identification and implementation of quantitative statistical approaches that adequately operationalise the concept of intersectionality are currently scarce.
Methods
An intersectionality-based framework for evaluation of gender sensitivity in multivariable analysis and for future study design was developed. The framework comprises operationalisation of sex/gender, definition of solution-linked variables from a gender mainstreaming perspective, definition and function of intersectional variables and consideration of central gender theoretical concepts. For evaluation of current practice regarding sex/gender sensitivity in intersectionality-informed analyses, a scoping review within selected thematic fields relevant for heath reporting has been conducted.
Findings
Based on 16 identified intersectionality-informed studies, sex/gender shows to be exclusively operationalised as binary. Solution-linked variables from a gender mainstreaming perspective are rarely taken into account. Sex/gender and race/ethnicity are the only intersectional variables considered in almost all studies, predominantly for stratification or as part of interaction terms. Income, education and employment status as proxies for social position as well as age are mainly used for adjustment in multivariable analyses.
Conclusions
The framework allows for comparison of gender sensitivity in intersectionality-based multivariable analysis. The project AdvanceDataAnalysis at the Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, University of Bremen, Germany, will contribute to the detection and analysis of complex interactions from an intersectionality perspective, including the consideration of gender theoretical concepts in multivariable analyses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Mena
- Department of Social Epidemiology, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
- Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| | - G Bolte
- Department of Social Epidemiology, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
- Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Mena E, Lindenberg ML, Turkbey IB, Shih JH, Harmon SA, Lim I, Lin F, Adler S, Eclarinal P, McKinney YL, Citrin D, Dahut W, Wood BJ, Krishnasamy V, Chang R, Levy E, Merino M, Pinto P, Eary JF, Choyke PL. 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Imaging in Patients with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Primary Local Therapy. J Nucl Med 2019; 61:881-889. [PMID: 31676732 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.119.234799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2019] [Accepted: 10/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Our objective was to investigate the lesion detection rate of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT, a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET agent, in patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer after primary local therapy. Methods: This was a prospective institutional review board-approved study of 90 patients with documented biochemical recurrence (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA], 2.5 ng/mL; range, 0.21-35.5 ng/mL) and negative results on conventional imaging after primary local therapies, including radical prostatectomy (n = 38), radiation (n = 27), or a combination of the two (n = 25). Patients on androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. Patients underwent whole-body 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT (299.9 ± 15.5 MBq) at 2 h after injection. The PSMA PET lesion detection rate was correlated with PSA, PSA kinetics, and original primary tumor grade. Results: Seventy patients (77.8%) showed positive PSMA PET results, with a total of 287 lesions identified: 37 prostate bed foci, 208 lesions in lymph nodes, and 42 in distant sites in bones or organs, Eleven patients had negative results, and 9 patients showed indeterminate lesions, which were considered negative in this study. The detection rates were 47.6% (n = 10/21), 50% (n = 5/10), 88.9% (n = 8/9), and 94% (n = 47/50) for PSA levels of >0.2 to <0.5, 0.5 to <1.0, 1 to <2.0, and ≥2.0 ng/mL, respectively. In postsurgical patients, PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity correlated with PET results, but the same was not true for postradiation patients. These parameters also correlated with the extent of disease on PET (intrapelvic vs. extrapelvic). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive scans between patients with higher-grade and lower-grade primary tumors (Gleason score of ≥4 + 3 vs. <3 + 4). Tumor recurrence was histology-confirmed in 40% (28/70) of patients. On a per-patient basis, positive predictive value was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 77.6%-99.2%) by histopathologic validation and 96.2% (95% confidence interval, 86.3%-99.7%) by the combination of histology and imaging/clinical follow-up. Conclusion: 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT imaging offers high detection rates in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer patients and is positive in about 50% of patients with a PSA level of less than 0.5 ng/mL, which could substantially impact clinical management. In postsurgical patients, 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT correlates with PSA, PSA doubling time, and PSA velocity, suggesting it may have prognostic value. 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT is highly promising for localizing sites of recurrent prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maria Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ismail Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Joanna H Shih
- Biometric Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Stephanie A Harmon
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ilhan Lim
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Frank Lin
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Stephen Adler
- Clinical Research Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Philip Eclarinal
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yolanda L McKinney
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - William Dahut
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Bradford J Wood
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Venkatesh Krishnasamy
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Richard Chang
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Elliot Levy
- Center of Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maria Merino
- Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; and
| | - Janet F Eary
- Cancer Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Srinivasan S, Crandall JP, Gajwani P, Sgouros G, Mena E, Lodge MA, Wahl RL. Human Radiation Dosimetry for Orally and Intravenously Administered 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med 2019; 61:613-619. [PMID: 31628217 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.119.233288] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2019] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Intravenous access is difficult in some patients referred for 18F-FDG PET imaging. Extravasation at the injection site and accumulation in central catheters can lead to limited tumor 18F-FDG uptake, erroneous quantitation, and significant image artifacts. In this study, we compared the human biodistribution and dosimetry for 18F-FDG after oral and intravenous administrations sequentially in the same subjects to ascertain the dosimetry and potential suitability of orally administered 18F-FDG as an alternative to intravenous administration. We also compared our detailed intravenous 18F-FDG dosimetry with older dosimetry data. Methods: Nine healthy volunteers (6 male and 3 female; aged 19-32 y) underwent PET/CT imaging after oral and intravenous administration of 18F-FDG. Identical preparation and imaging protocols (except administration route) were used for oral and intravenous studies. During each imaging session, 9 whole-body PET scans were obtained at 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 120, and 240 min after 18F-FDG administration (370 ± 16 MBq). Source organ contours drawn using CT were overlaid onto registered PET images to extract time-activity curves. Time-integrated activity coefficients derived from time-activity curves were given as input to OLINDA/EXM for dose calculations. Results: Blood uptake after orally administered 18F-FDG peaked at 45-50 min after ingestion. The oral-to-intravenous ratios of 18F-FDG uptake for major organs at 45 min were 1.07 ± 0.24 for blood, 0.94 ± 0.39 for heart wall, 0.47 ± 0.12 for brain, 1.25 ± 0.18 for liver, and 0.84 ± 0.24 for kidneys. The highest organ-absorbed doses (μGy/MBq) after oral 18F-FDG administration were observed for urinary bladder (75.9 ± 17.2), stomach (48.4 ± 14.3), and brain (29.4 ± 5.1), and the effective dose was significantly higher (20%) than after intravenous administration (P = 0.002). Conclusion: 18F-FDG has excellent bioavailability after oral administration, but peak organ activities occur later than after intravenous injection. These data suggest PET at 2 h after oral 18F-FDG administration should yield images that are comparable in biodistribution to conventional clinical images acquired 1 h after injection. Oral 18F-FDG is a palatable alternative to intravenous 18F-FDG when venous access is problematic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Senthamizhchelvan Srinivasan
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Health Care System, Chattanooga, Tennessee
| | - John P Crandall
- Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri; and
| | - Prateek Gajwani
- Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - George Sgouros
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Martin A Lodge
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Richard L Wahl
- Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland .,Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri; and
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Lim I, Lindenberg ML, Mena E, Verdini N, Shih JH, Mayfield C, Thompson R, Lin J, Vega A, Mallek M, Cadena J, Diaz C, Mortazavi A, Knopp M, Wright C, Stein M, Pal S, Choyke PL, Apolo AB. 18F-Sodium fluoride PET/CT predicts overall survival in patients with advanced genitourinary malignancies treated with cabozantinib and nivolumab with or without ipilimumab. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 47:178-184. [PMID: 31522271 PMCID: PMC6885023 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-019-04483-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2019] [Accepted: 08/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Purpose We evaluated the prognostic value of 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) PET/CT in patients with urological malignancies treated with cabozantinib and nivolumab with or without ipilimumab. Methods We prospectively recruited patients with advanced urological malignancies into a phase I trial of cabozantinib plus nivolumab with or without ipilimumab. NaF PET/CT scans were performed pre- and 8 weeks post-treatment. We measured the total volume of fluoride avid bone (FTV) using a standardized uptake value (SUV) threshold of 10. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis to predict the overall survival (OS) of patients in terms of SUVmax, FTV, total lesion fluoride (TLF) uptake at baseline and 8 weeks post-treatment, and percent change in FTV and TLF. Result Of 111 patients who underwent NaF PET/CT, 30 had bone metastases at baseline. Four of the 30 patients survived for the duration of the study period. OS ranged from 0.23 to 34 months (m) (median 6.0 m). The baseline FTV of all 30 patients ranged from 9.6 to 1570 ml (median 439 ml). The FTV 8 weeks post-treatment was 56–6296 ml (median 448 ml) from 19 available patients. Patients with higher TLF at baseline had shorter OS than patients with lower TLF (3.4 vs 14 m; p = 0.022). Patients with higher SUVmax at follow-up had shorter OS than patients with lower SUVmax (5.6 vs 24 m; p = 0.010). However, FTV and TLF 8 weeks post-treatment did not show a significant difference between groups (5.6 vs 17 m; p = 0.49), and the percent changes in FTV (12 vs 14 m; p = 0.49) and TLF (5.6 vs 17 m; p = 0.54) also were not significant. Conclusion Higher TLF at baseline and higher SUVmax at follow-up NaF PET/CT corresponded with shorter survival in patients with bone metastases from urological malignancies who underwent treatment. NaF PET/CT may be a useful predictor of OS in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilhan Lim
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, B3B403, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.,Department of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences (KIRAMS), Seoul, South Korea
| | - Maria Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, B3B403, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, B3B403, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Nicholas Verdini
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Joanna H Shih
- Biometric Research Branch, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Christian Mayfield
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Ryan Thompson
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jeffrey Lin
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Andy Vega
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Marissa Mallek
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Jacqueline Cadena
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Carlos Diaz
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Amir Mortazavi
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Michael Knopp
- Wright Center of Innovation in Biomedical Imaging, Division of Imaging Science, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Chadwick Wright
- Wright Center of Innovation in Biomedical Imaging, Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Mark Stein
- Division of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Sumanta Pal
- City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, B3B403, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA
| | - Andrea B Apolo
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. .,Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., 13N240, MSC 1906, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Cabrera LO, Aguiar JO, Peix A, Padron K, Mena E, Escarano R, Carrillo R, Rodriguez L. P144Prognostic significance of perfusion and functional parameters from myocardial perfusion scintigraphy with positive ECG on stress test. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2019. [DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jez147.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- L O Cabrera
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - J O Aguiar
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - A Peix
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - K Padron
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - E Mena
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - R Escarano
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - R Carrillo
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| | - L Rodriguez
- Institute of Cardiology, Nuclear Medicine, Havana, Cuba
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Verdini NP, Lim I, Mena E, Lindenberg L, Mortazavi A, Pal SK, Lara P, Graap K, Mallek M, Keen C, Thompson R, Mayfield C, Turrell C, Cadena J, Saraiya B, Lilly RL, Knopp MV, Wright C, Steinberg SM, Apolo AB. Prognostic value of sequential 18F-FDG + Na 18F PET/CT (NaF+FDG PET) in metastatic genitourinary (GU) cancer patients (pts) treated with cabozantinib/nivolumab +/- ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi). J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.4544] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
4544 Background: NaF+FDG PET imaging are used to assess soft tissue and bone metastases. The prognostic value of NaF+FDG PET in GU cancer pts was assessed as a secondary endpoint within a phase I trial of combination CaboNivoIpi. Methods: NaF+FDG PET scans were collected at baseline and cycle (C)3 day (D)1 for 50pts. Up to 50 lesions/patient were analyzed at baseline, up to 10 lesions/organ in case of extensive disease. Lesion number and whole-body metabolic tumor volume (wMTV) were recorded at baseline, C3D1 and percent change for FDG and NaF scans. Whole-body total lesion glycolysis (wTLG) and its percent change was obtained for FDG scans. Parameters were evaluated with respect to OS using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank, with quartiles, then refined to show strongest distinction, adjusting p-values to account for this exploration. Parameters with strongest OS association were also analyzed for associations with OS in urothelial carcinoma (UC) pts. Results: 50 pts, (UC (n = 20); others (renal cell, prostate, urachal/adenocarcinoma, germ cell, penile, bladder squamous cell (n = 2-7 each)). Median (m) overall survival (OS) was 23.9 months (mo) (95% CI: 13.7mo – NE) with 29.7mo m potential follow up and mOS of 24.7mo (95% CI: 13.7mo-NE) for UC. For FDG in all pts, wMTV: baseline ≤ vs > 51.6, mOS (NR vs 10mo, p = .0006), C3D1 ≤ vs > 85 mOS (25.9mo vs 5.1mo, p = .0001), percent change (0/increase vs decrease, mOS 14mo vs 25.9mo, p = .015); wTLG: baseline ≤ vs > 178, mOS (NR vs 11.5mo, p = .011), C3D1 ≤ vs > 300, mOS (25.9mo vs 8.3mo, p < .0001), percent change decrease vs increase, mOS (25.9mo vs 14.0mo, p = .016); and lesion number: baseline ≤ vs > 13, mOS (25.9mo vs 9.9mo, p = .0090), C3D1 ≤ vs > 13 mOS (25.9mo vs 9.9mo, p < .0001) significantly predicted OS. In UC pts, wMTV percent change (0/increase vs decrease, mOS 14mo vs. 25.9mo, p = .057), wTLG percent change decrease vs increase, mOS (NR vs 8.4mo, p = .0015), and lesion number C3D1 ≤ vs > 13 mOS (25.9mo vs 2.8mo, p = .022) significantly predicted OS. NaF parameters failed to do so. Conclusions: FDG wMTV and wTLG at baseline, C3D1, and percent change and lesion number at baseline and C3D1, predicted OS in GU cancer pts on CaboNivoIpi. Clinical trial information: NCT02496208.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ilhan Lim
- Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Amir Mortazavi
- Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Primo Lara
- University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA
| | | | | | - Corrine Keen
- Thoracic and Gastrointestinal Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Ryan Thompson
- Genitourinary Malignancies Brach, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | | | - Corinne Turrell
- Office of Clinical Research, UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA
| | - Jacqueline Cadena
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | - Biren Saraiya
- The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Lawernceville, NJ
| | - Ray L Lilly
- The James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Michael V. Knopp
- Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Chadwick Wright
- Division of Molecular Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | | | - Andrea B. Apolo
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Lin F, Del Rivero J, Carrasquillo JA, Jha A, Gonzales MK, Lindenberg L, Turkbey B, Lin E, Mena E, Millo C, Chen C, Herscovitch P, Choyke PL, Pacak K. Phase 2 trial of Lu-177-DOTATATE in inoperable pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.tps4159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS4159 Background: Pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma (PHEO/PGL) is a rare malignancy that arises from chromaffin cells of typically the adrenal medulla but can also be of extra-adrenal origin. These tumors produce excessive catecholamines such as epinephrine and norepinephrine which causes labile hypertension, tachycardia, and flushing. Lu-177-DOTATATE (Lu-177-dodecanetetraacetic acid‐tyrosine-3-octreotate) is a radiolabeled somatostatin analog that is FDA approved for somatostatin receptor-positive neuroendocrine tumors. It is being being investigated in PHEO/PGL, which overexpress somatostatin receptors. Amino acid solutions containing lysine/arginine (L/A) are routinely co-administered with Lu-177-DOTATATE for renal radioprotection, although solutions containing other amino acids are also used. Methods: This is a prospective, single center, open label Phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy of Lu-177-DOTATATE in PHEO/PGL. Ninety patients will be enrolled, divided into two cohorts of 45 patients each ( SDHx mutation vs. apparent sporadic). Lu-177-DOTATATE is given at a fixed dose of 200 mCi with a co-administration of L/A amino acid solution q8 weeks for 4 cycles. The primary endpoint is the progression-free-survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. Secondary endpoints include response rate, overall survival, time to progression, quality of life measures, and examination of potential biomarkers such as biochemical profiles, Ga-68-DOTATATE PET, and F-18-FDG PET scans. Eligibility criteria include inoperable disease (including non-metastatic), histological confirmation of PHEO/PGL, evidence of disease progression by RECIST 1.1, ECOG performance status of 1 or better, and a positive Ga-68-DOTATATE PET scan. Exclusion criteria include prior treatment with systemic radionuclide therapy such as I-131-MIBG, brain parenchymal metastases, and standard organ dysfunction limitations. Interim analysis using a Simon two-stage optimal design will be performed separately for each cohort after enrollment of 18 patients. First patient accrual to this ongoing study was in the Fall of 2017, and as of February 2019, fourteen patients have been accrued. Preliminary results will be reported at the completion of stage 1 for each cohort. Clinical trial information: NCT03206060.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frank Lin
- National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Emily Lin
- National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Corina Millo
- PET Department at National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Clara Chen
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter Herscovitch
- PET Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L. Choyke
- National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Karel Pacak
- Section on Medical Neuroendocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Abstract
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men worldwide, but it exhibits a highly variable biological behavior ranging from indolent to highly aggressive disease. The standard conventional imaging for staging PCa consists of CT, MRI, and bone scans, but this imaging has suboptimal accuracy for extraprostatic tumor detection, particularly in the scenario of early biochemical relapse when the prostate-specific antigen levels are still low indicating a low volume of recurrent disease. This gap between known disease (as indicated by a rising prostate-specific antigen) and the failure to detect it on conventional imaging, has led to the development of novel imaging probes most of which have positron emitting radioactive tags. In the last decade, multiple PET probes have demonstrated promising performance in detecting sites of recurrence and extent of disease in patients with PCa. The landscape of available PET radiotracers is changing rapidly and includes radiolabeled choline, anti1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid (18F-fluciclovine), bombesin, dihydrotestosterone, and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands, among others. Of these, radiolabeled PSMA-PET agents have shown the most encouraging results in terms of sensitivity and are likely to become universally available for imaging PCa within a few years Other PET radiotracers such as bombesin-based radiotracers and antagonist of gastrin releasing-peptide receptor (RM2) are emerging as possible alternatives for PCa imaging. This review article discusses the current and near-future of PET molecular imaging probes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH. Bethesda, MD
| | - Liza M Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH. Bethesda, MD
| | - Peter L Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH. Bethesda, MD.
| |
Collapse
|