Skip to main content

Open Access 16.05.2024 | Original Article

Evaluation of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a Phase 1 clinical study in Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent prostate cancer

verfasst von: Anri Inaki, Atsushi Mizokami, Hiroshi Wakabayashi, Kouji Izumi, Yoshifumi Kadono, Tadashi Toyama, Shizuko Takahara, Toshinori Murayama, Seigo Kinuya

Erschienen in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

Background

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radiopharmaceuticals allow whole-body imaging to detect prostate cancer (PC). Positron emission tomography imaging using gallium-68 (68Ga)-PSMA-11 has been shown to have a favorable safety and tolerability profile and high diagnostic performance. The study evaluates the safety and pharmacokinetics of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent prostate cancer.

Methods

This single arm study enrolled Japanese patients with primary PC (n = 3), suspected recurrent PC following radical prostatectomy (n = 4), or suspected recurrent PC following radical radiotherapy (n = 3). All patients received a single intravenous dose of 68Ga-PSMA-11 2.0 MBq/kg (±10%) followed by PSMA PET imaging and safety and pharmacokinetic evaluations. Based on the blood concentrations of 68Ga-PSMA-11 and the radioactivity distribution rate in each organ/tissue, the absorbed doses in major organs/tissues and the whole-body effective dose were calculated by the Medical Internal Radiation Dose method.

Results

Ten patients were enrolled. Mean age was 73.3 ± 4.8 years, and median prostate-specific antigen was 8.250 ng/mL. Five patients (50%) experienced a total of 6 adverse events, and no grade ≥ 2 adverse events or serious adverse events were reported. No clinically significant changes in vital signs, haematology parameters, or blood chemistry or ECG abnormalities were observed. The estimated whole body effective dose of 68Ga-PSMA-11 (mean ± standard deviation) was 2.524 × 10–2 ± 2.546 × 10–3 mSv/MBq. Time to maximum concentration (1.16 × 10–4 ± 1.3 × 10–5% ID/mL) in whole blood was 2.15 ± 0.33 min.

Conclusions

68Ga-PSMA-11 has a favourable safety and tolerability profile in Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent prostate cancer, which is comparable to previous observations in other populations.
Hinweise
A part of this study was presented as an oral presentation at the 60th Annual Meeting of Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction

Prostate cancer (PC) has increasing significance: it is the second most frequent cancer diagnosis in patients and the fifth leading cause of cancer death worldwide [1]. In Japan, the incidence of PC has been growing rapidly over the past decades. The age-standardized incidence rate rose from 7.1 in 1975 to 58.7 per 100,000 in 2014 [2]. PC remains the sixth major cause of death in Japanese patients [2] and was the leading cancer-related cause of death in 2020 [3].
Imaging of the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has become an important tool for managing patients with PC, and PSMA positron emission imaging (PET) is now part of the diagnostic flowchart for PC in international guidelines [4]. In primary PC, PSMA PET has shown superiority to cross-sectional imaging for the detection of pelvic lymph nodes and distant metastases. In PC recurrence, higher detection rates have been observed for PSMA PET than for any other available imaging techniques, especially at low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values [4].
One of the most frequently employed radiotracers is gallium-68 (68Ga)-PSMA-11 [5], which is currently approved for use in the United States, Australia, and Canada. In the multicentre proPSMA study, 302 patients with untreated, biopsy-proven PC were randomly assigned to undergo 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/computerized tomography (CT) or conventional imaging for the evaluation of pelvic nodal and distant metastatic disease [6]. Accuracy was 27% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23%–31%; p < 0.0001) greater with 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT than with conventional imaging (92% vs. 65%, respectively). Sensitivity and specificity were also greater with 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT (85% and 98%, respectively) compared to conventional imaging (38% and 91%, respectively) [6]. In a single arm study of 764 patients with histopathology-proven PC in the United States, sensitivity and specificity of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET for primary staging was 40% and 95%, respectively [7]. In a prospective study that enrolled 635 patients with biochemically recurrent PC, 68Ga-PSMA-11 imaging had a positive predictive rate of 92% and detection rate of 75% [8].
We aimed to evaluate the safety of 68Ga-PSMA-11, administered using the injection kit for PET/CT imaging in a sample of Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent PC.

Materials and methods

Study design

This was a single-centre, open-label, prospective phase I study approved by the Institutional Review Board of Kanazawa University Hospital and registered with the Japanese Registry of Clinical Trials (identifier: JRCT2041200110). The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki and International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. All patients provided written informed consent for participation in the study. The objectives of the study were to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of 68Ga-PSMA-11 used for PET/CT scans in patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent PC.

Patient population

Japanese males (> 20 years of age) with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent PC were divided into 3 investigative cohorts (Fig. 1). Cohort 1 included patients with histologically confirmed untreated high-risk PC or advanced PC (N1 or M1). Cohort 2 included patients with histologically confirmed PC, treated with radical prostatectomy at initial onset, who then had recurrent disease in a local or metastatic lesion and an increase in blood PSA concentration from baseline and suspected recurrence on imaging (such as bone scintigraphy, CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and fluorodeoxyglucose-PET). Cohort 3 included patients with histologically confirmed PC at the initial onset, treated with radical radiotherapy (external irradiation, interstitial irradiation, or its combination) who then had confirmed recurrent PC in a locally recurrent or metastatic lesion, an increase in blood PSA concentration from baseline and suspected recurrence on imaging. All patients were required to have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 or 1 within 28 days prior to study enrolment and agree to use proper contraception until 90 days after investigational drug administration. Patients with an active second cancer, virus infections or other infections or conditions necessitating treatment during the study period or with previous exposure to 68Ga-PSMA-11, were excluded from this study.

68Ga-PSMA-11 administration

A single intravenous dose of 68Ga-PSMA-11 2.0 MBq/kg (± 10%) was administered using the 68Ga-PSMA-11 injection kit provided by Telix Pharmaceuticals and 68Ge/68Ga generator AX001 (Fig. 1). Briefly, gallium (68Ga) chloride and 25 µg of PSMA-11 reconstituted with acetate buffer were transferred into a sterile vacuumed vial. Quality control was performed according to the manufacturer’s recommendations by visual examination, pH testing, and instant thin layer chromatography. 68Ga-PSMA-11 was administered within 28 days of trial registration.

PSMA PET imaging

PET/CT imaging was performed using a Philips Vereos PET-CT system (serial no: 9000105). The imaging protocol was designed to capture a comprehensive head-to-toe assessment, spanning approximately 17–18 bed positions per patient. Patients were scanned in each bed position for 180 s. The temporal acquisition points were set at 5, 60, and 120 min following administration of 68Ga-PSMA-11.
Image reconstruction parameters were optimized to ensure image quality and quantitative accuracy. A Pool Phantom was used to encapsulate 68Ga, and then the uniformity of the radiotracer distribution and a standardized uptake value of 1 were validated. The reconstruction algorithm utilized was Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization combined with Time-of-Flight information. The specific settings for the reconstruction were as follows: 2 iterations, 11 subsets, and a 3 mm Gaussian filter. Attenuation correction was performed using CT-based attenuation correction, while scatter correction was achieved through the Single Scatter Simulation method. The reconstructed images had a voxel size of 2 × 2x2 mm in the X, Y, and Z dimensions. The field of view for PET imaging was set to 567 mm and for CT-AC was set to 600 mm.

Safety assessment

Safety and tolerability assessment was based on physical examination, vital signs, haematology, serum chemistry, urinalysis, 12-lead electrocardiograms, MRI, CT, PSMA PET together with subjective findings and ECOG PS at predefined time intervals. Adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence (including an abnormal laboratory value), whether or not related to the investigational drug. Adverse reactions were defined as adverse events for which a causal relationship with the investigational drug could not be ruled out. All adverse events and adverse reactions were graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE version 5).
Adverse events were collected from drug administration through Day 7 follow-up. Vital signs and subjective and objective symptoms were assessed prior to study entry and at 30, 60, 120 min and 7 days after administration of 68Ga-PSMA-11. Laboratory tests were performed on venous blood samples collected prior to dosing and 120 min and 7 days after administration.

Pharmacokinetics

Following 68Ga-PSMA-11 administration, blood samples were collected at 2, 5, 30, 60, and 120 min for pharmacokinetic and blood radioactivity evaluation. Urine samples for pharmacokinetic and radioactivity evaluation were collected at 60 and 120 min post-administration, and the well-counter Hitachi-Aloka DCM-200 was used to analyze blood and urine samples.

Dosimetry

The effective dose (mSv/MBq) in the whole body and the absorbed dose (mGy/MBq) in each organ were evaluated. The effective dose in the whole body was calculated based on the estimated absorbed doses of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in major organs/tissues using tissue weighting factors as described in the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 103 using the Medical Internal Radiation Dose method [9]. Phoenix Winnonlin was used to calculate dosimetry, and OLINDA2 was used to calculate absorbed and effective doses.

Statistical analysis

Pharmacokinetic parameters, including area under the blood concentration–time curve (AUC), clearance (CL), elimination phase volume of distribution (Vz), and elimination half-life (T1/2z) were calculated. Grade ≥ 3 safety events (and ≥ Grade 2 for adverse events other than laboratory values) were summarised using descriptive statistics. Absorbed and effective dose estimates were calculated by the medical internal radiation dose method and means, medians, and standard deviations (SD) are reported.

Results

In total, ten male patients were included (n = 3, n = 4, and n = 3 in Cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Cohort 1 included patients with untreated high-risk PC or advanced PC (N1 or M1). Cohort 2 included patients with suspected recurrent PC following radical prostatectomy. Cohort 3 included patients with suspected recurrent PC following radical radiotherapy (external irradiation, interstitial irradiation, or its combination). All patients underwent dosing with 68Ga-PSMA-11 followed by PET imaging. Representative PET/CT images are depicted in Fig. 2.
Baseline demographics are presented in Table 1. The mean age was 73.3 years, all patients had ECOG performance status of 0. PSA (Mean ± SD) was 33.211 ± 70.692 ng/mL in all patients, 92.720 ± 120.943 ng/mL in Cohort 1, 1.003 ± 1.181 ng/mL in Cohort 2, and 16.647 ± 7.762 ng/mL in Cohort 3.
Table 1
Demographics and baseline characteristics by patient
Patient #
Cohort
Age (years)
Body weight (kg)
Height (cm)
PSA (ng/mL)
Gleason score
TNM classification at enrollment
1
2
74
69.5
165.0
0.799
4 + 5
TxN0M0
2
1
69
66.4
178.3
40.500
4 + 4
T3aN0M0
3
3
84
62.5
163.3
9.840
5 + 4
T0N0M1b
4
2
73
66.4
168.4
0.227
3 + 3
TxN0M1a
5
2
70
57.0
166.4
0.257
4 + 4
TxN0M0
6
3
89
75.7
165.3
15.000
4 + 3
T0N0M0
7
1
71
69.6
167.5
231.000
4 + 4
T3bN1M1a
8
1
71
75.5
161.3
6.660
4 + 3
TxN0M0
9
2
73
73.2
174.0
2.730
4 + 3
TxN1M0
10
3
69
91.3
177.0
25.100
3 + 3
T0N0M1b
PSA prostate-specific antigen, TNM tumour, lymph nodes, metastasis Union for International Cancer Control staging system, T0 no local PCa lesion due to hormone therapy or radiation therapy, Tx no prostate due to radical prostatectomy

Safety

Five patients (50%) experienced a total of 6 adverse events: 66.7% (2/3 patients) in Cohort 1, 50.0% (2/4 patients) in Cohort 2, and 33.3% (1/3 patients) in Cohort 3 (Table 2). These included one occurrence each of injection site haemorrhage, injection site pain, injection site discomfort, amylase increased, neck pain, and dysuria. No Grade ≥ 2 adverse events or serious adverse events were observed in any patient. The events of injection site pain, injection site discomfort, and dysuria were also considered to be adverse reactions (adverse events that may be related to experimental treatment). One patient each reported increased amylase, neck pain, and dysuria. The dysuria event was determined to be related to 68Ga-PSMA-11, while amylase and neck pain events were determined to not be related. Adverse reactions were reported by 30.0% (3/10 patients) overall, 33.3% (1/3 patients) in Cohort 1, 25.0% (1/4 patients) in Cohort 2, and 33.3% (1/3 patients) in Cohort 3.
Table 2
Grade 1 adverse events in all cohorts
 
All patients
(n = 10)
Cohort 1
(n = 3)
Cohort 2
(n = 4)
Cohort 3
(n = 3)
Patients with adverse events, n (%)
5 (50.0)
2 (66.7)
2 (50)
1 (33.3)
Reported adverse events, n
6
2
3
1
General disorders and administration site conditions, n (%)
3 (30.0)
0
2 (50)
1 (33.3)
Injection site haemorrhage, n (%)
1 (10)
0
1 (25)
0
Injection site pain, n (%)
1 (10)
0
0
1 (33.3)
Injection site discomfort, n (%)
1 (10)
0
1 (25)
0
Investigations, n (%)
1 (10)
0
1 (25)
0
Amylase increased, n (%)
1 (10)
0
1 (25)
0
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, n (%)
1 (10)
1 (33.3)
0
0
Neck pain, n (%)
1 (10)
1 (33.3)
0
0
Renal and urinary disorders, n (%)
1 (10)
1 (33.3)
0
0
Dysuria, n (%)
1 (10)
1 (33.3)
0
0
No Grade ≥ 2 adverse events or serious adverse events were observed in any patient
No clinically significant changes in vital signs, haematology parameters, or blood chemistry, were observed throughout the study. No electrocardiogram abnormalities were observed for any patient.

Whole-body distribution and dose estimation

Estimated absorbed doses in major organs/tissues are given in Table 3. The estimated whole body effective dose (mean ± SD) was 2.524 × 10–2 ± 2.546 × 10–3 mSv/MBq.
Table 3
Estimated absorbed doses of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in major organs
Target Organ
(n = 10)
Estimated absorbed dose of 68Ga-PSMA-11, mGy/MBq
Median
Mean ± SD
Adrenals
4.035 × 10–2
4.109 × 10–2 ± 1.125 × 10–2
Brain
2.150 × 10–3
2.545 × 10–3 ± 1.594 × 10–3
Oesophagus
9.150 × 10–3
9.180 × 10–3 ± 5.187 × 10–4
Eyes
6.285 × 10–3
6.303 × 10–3 ± 5.397 × 10–4
Gallbladder wall
1.560 × 10–2
4.632 × 10–2 ± 9.111 × 10–2
Left colon
1.780 × 10–2
2.101 × 10–2 ± 1.271 × 10–2
Small intestine
3.865 × 10–2
3.893 × 10–2 ± 8.457 × 10–3
Stomach wall
1.420 × 10–2
1.516 × 10–2 ± 2.746 × 10–3
Right colon
1.475 × 10–2
1.467 × 10–2 ± 2.312 × 10–3
Rectum
1.085 × 10–2
1.095 × 10–2 ± 1.028 × 10–3
Heart wall
2.125 × 10–2
2.308 × 10–2 ± 6.016 × 10–3
Kidneys
0.3405
0.3171 ± 0.1178
Liver
3.215 × 10–2
3.30.6 × 10–2 ± 6.040 × 10–3
Lungs
2.045 × 10–2
2.117 × 10–2 ± 4.202 × 10–3
Pancreas
1.550 × 10–2
1.645 × 10–2 ± 3.131 × 10–3
Prostate
1.185 × 10–2
1.207 × 10–2 ± 1.537 × 10–3
Salivary glands
0.1180
0.1201 ± 3.944 × 10–2
Red marrow
9.840 × 10–3
1.091 × 10–2 ± 2.623 × 10–3
Osteogenic cells
1.002 × 10–2
1.211 × 10–2 ± 4.755 × 10–3
Spleen
4.015 × 10–2
4.403 × 10–2 ± 1.883 × 10–2
Testes
9.825 × 10–3
1.074 × 10–2 ± 4.120 × 10–3
Thymus
7.865 × 10–3
9.271 × 10–3 ± 3.458 × 10–3
Thyroid
8.615 × 10–3
9.979 × 10–3 ± 6.332 × 10–3
urinary bladder wall
0.1410
0.1497 ± 7.394 × 10–2
Total body
1.160 × 10–2
1.167 × 10–2 ± 2.584 × 10–4
MBq megabecquerel, mGy milli-gray, SD standard deviation

Pharmacokinetics

Blood concentrations for individual patients from 2 to 120 min after 68Ga-PSMA-11 administration are shown in Fig. 3. Time to maximum concentration (mean ± SD: 1.16 × 10–4 ± 1.3 × 10–5% ID/mL) in whole blood was 2.15 ± 0.33 min. Individual blood concentrations ranged from 9.16 to 20.16 kBq/mL at 2 min and decreased to 1.38 to 4.69 kBq/mL by 120 min.
Pharmacokinetic parameters (mean ± SD, n = 9) were as follows: T1/2z, 94.16 ± 9.04 min; AUC from dose administration to last measurable concentration (AUClast), 2.828 × 10–3 ± 3.18 × 10–4 min × % ID/mL; AUC from dose administration until elimination from the body (AUCinf), 4.803 × 10–3 ± 7.77 × 10–4 min × %ID/mL; Vz, 28.64268 ± 3.15303 L; and CL, 213.01 ± 33.67 mL/minute.

Discussion

Accurate diagnostic imaging is crucial for detecting local recurrence or metastatic lesions in patients with prostate cancer [10]. Conventional imaging, such as CT, MRI, or bone scintigraphy, has been historically used to determine the extent of lymph node involvement and presence of metastases [10]. However, conventional imaging is limited in specificity and positivity [1115], potentially subjecting patients to unnecessary harmful and costly procedures [16]. PSMA-targeted radiopharmaceuticals allow whole-body imaging for the detection of PC spread, and their increased sensitivity and specificity make them ideally suited for front-line imaging [17]. They are also associated with higher detection rates compared with other agents used in PC imaging [18]. Globally, PSMA PET is an emerging standard of care in PC imaging [4, 6, 19] with several products either approved or in development worldwide.
68Ga-PSMA-11 has been used in clinical practice outside Japan for approximately four years and the updated Society of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging Appropriate Use Criteria include 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT as an alternative to standard bone and soft tissue imaging [20]. Since its development in 2012 [21], the 68Ga-PSMA-11 injection kit has been widely used in PET/CT imaging of prostate cancer and evaluated in many clinical studies, and a vast amount of clinical data have been obtained worldwide in prospective studies, retrospective studies, the phase 3 VISION study, and investigator-initiated clinical trials [7, 8, 2227]. Due to the widely available clinical data already available in healthy volunteers, this study sought to confirm the favourable safety and tolerability of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in the Japanese patient population compared to other populations [6, 7]. As in studies in other populations, no serious adverse events were observed in any cohorts in this trial.
A purification step is not required for 68Ga-PSMA-11, unlike other radiolabelling methods for PSMA, enabling rapid radiolabelling at room temperature with high radiochemical purity and production consistency, suited to the hospital radio-pharmacy setting. A commercially available 68Ga-based PSMA PET imaging kit has been approved in Canada, New Zealand, and Australia. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration has approved for patients with suspected metastasis who are candidates for initial definitive therapy, patients with suspected recurrence based on elevated serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and for selection of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, for whom lutetium-177 (177Lu) vipivotide tetraxetan PSMA-directed therapy is indicated [28].
This trial also confirmed the blood concentrations of 68Ga-PSMA-11 and its pharmacokinetic parameters, as well as the estimated exposure dose of 68Ga-PSMA-11 in the organs/tissues and whole body in Japanese men. In addition, the time-course of blood drug concentration and the distribution of radioactivity in the Japanese population observed in this clinical trial were similar to those in the non-Japanese population observed in overseas clinical trials [6, 7].
Recently, results from two phase 1/2 trials exploring 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT imaging for Japanese patients with prostate cancer have been published [29, 30]. Direct comparison of radiotracer performance is challenging and has not been studied in a large, prospective trial with lesion validation [31]. However, of available radiotracers, 68Ga-PSMA-11 has the most real-world evidence and studied most in clinical trials [31]. Interpretation of bone lesions, largely due to unspecific uptake, is more difficult on imaging acquired with 18F-labelled radiotracers than with 68Ga-PSMA-11 [3235]. 18F-PSMA-1007 imaging has been shown to have significantly higher rates of nonspecific uptake, or equivocal bone lesions, than 68Ga-PSMA-11 imaging [36].
A recent comprehensive review has suggested that, from an imaging point of view, 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT is unquestionably one of the most useful tools for the therapeutic management of patients with PC in the clinical setting in 2020 and foreseeable future [5]. Our trial results demonstrate that 68Ga-PSMA-11 has a favourable safety and tolerability profile for Japanese patients.

Conclusion

68Ga-PSMA-11 has a favourable safety and tolerability profile in Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent prostate cancer. The time-course of blood drug concentration and the distribution of radioactivity in the Japanese population are comparable to previous observations in other populations.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the patients who participated in the trial. The authors also wish to thank investigators Tomo Hiromasa, Takafumi Yamase, Yi Kunita, Norihito Amatani, Kazuyoshi Shigehara, Takahiro Nohara, Yasuhito Imai, and Hisayuki Ogura for their contributions. Medical writing support, under the direction of the authors, was provided by Clare Gurton, Jacobson Medical Writing, Inc, Jess Roetman, and Stefanie Martina, and was funded by Telix Pharmaceuticals, in accordance with Good Publication Practice 2022 guidelines.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Jetzt e.Med zum Sonderpreis bestellen!

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Jetzt bestellen und 100 € sparen!

e.Med Radiologie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Radiologie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen des Fachgebietes Radiologie, den Premium-Inhalten der radiologischen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten Radiologie-Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. global cancer statistics 2020: globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.CrossRefPubMed Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. global cancer statistics 2020: globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Saito E, Hori M, Matsuda T, Yoneoka D, Ito Y, Katanoda K. Long-term trends in prostate cancer incidence by stage at diagnosis in Japan using the multiple imputation approach, 1993–2014. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29(6):1222–8.CrossRefPubMed Saito E, Hori M, Matsuda T, Yoneoka D, Ito Y, Katanoda K. Long-term trends in prostate cancer incidence by stage at diagnosis in Japan using the multiple imputation approach, 1993–2014. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29(6):1222–8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Farolfi A, Calderoni L, Mattana F, Mei R, Telo S, Fanti S, Castellucci P. Current and emerging clinical applications of PSMA PET diagnostic imaging for prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(5):596–604.CrossRefPubMed Farolfi A, Calderoni L, Mattana F, Mei R, Telo S, Fanti S, Castellucci P. Current and emerging clinical applications of PSMA PET diagnostic imaging for prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(5):596–604.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Bois F, Noirot C, Dietemann S, Mainta IC, Zilli T, Garibotto V, Walter MA. [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in prostate cancer: a comprehensive review. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020;10(6):349–74.PubMedPubMedCentral Bois F, Noirot C, Dietemann S, Mainta IC, Zilli T, Garibotto V, Walter MA. [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 in prostate cancer: a comprehensive review. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020;10(6):349–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395(10231):1208–16.CrossRefPubMed Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395(10231):1208–16.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Hope TA, Eiber M, Armstrong WR, Juarez R, Murthy V, Lawhn-Heath C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET for pelvic nodal metastasis detection prior to radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a multicenter prospective phase 3 imaging trial. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(11):1635–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hope TA, Eiber M, Armstrong WR, Juarez R, Murthy V, Lawhn-Heath C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET for pelvic nodal metastasis detection prior to radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a multicenter prospective phase 3 imaging trial. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(11):1635–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, Flavell RR, Mishoe A, Feng FY, et al. Assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy in localizing recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(6):856–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Fendler WP, Calais J, Eiber M, Flavell RR, Mishoe A, Feng FY, et al. Assessment of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET accuracy in localizing recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-arm clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(6):856–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Zurück zum Zitat The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2–4):1–332. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2–4):1–332.
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Menezes ME, Das SK, Minn I, Emdad L, Wang XY, Sarkar D, et al. Detecting tumor metastases: the road to therapy starts here. Adv Cancer Res. 2016;132:1–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Menezes ME, Das SK, Minn I, Emdad L, Wang XY, Sarkar D, et al. Detecting tumor metastases: the road to therapy starts here. Adv Cancer Res. 2016;132:1–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Choueiri TK, Dreicer R, Paciorek A, Carroll PR, Konety B. A model that predicts the probability of positive imaging in prostate cancer cases with biochemical failure after initial definitive local therapy. J Urol. 2008;179(3):906–10.CrossRefPubMed Choueiri TK, Dreicer R, Paciorek A, Carroll PR, Konety B. A model that predicts the probability of positive imaging in prostate cancer cases with biochemical failure after initial definitive local therapy. J Urol. 2008;179(3):906–10.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Hricak H, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Leibel SA, Scardino PT. Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology. 2007;243(1):28–53.CrossRefPubMed Hricak H, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Leibel SA, Scardino PT. Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology. 2007;243(1):28–53.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Ikonen S, Karkkainen P, Kivisaari L, Salo JO, Taari K, Vehmas T, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1998;159(3):915–9.CrossRefPubMed Ikonen S, Karkkainen P, Kivisaari L, Salo JO, Taari K, Vehmas T, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1998;159(3):915–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1163–74.CrossRefPubMed Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1163–74.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Merdan S, Womble PR, Miller DC, Barnett C, Ye Z, Linsell SM, et al. Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer. Urology. 2014;84(4):793–8.CrossRefPubMed Merdan S, Womble PR, Miller DC, Barnett C, Ye Z, Linsell SM, et al. Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer. Urology. 2014;84(4):793–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Pahwa S, Schiltz NK, Ponsky LE, Lu Z, Griswold MA, Gulani V. Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided strategies for detection of prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men. Radiology. 2017;285(1):157–66.CrossRefPubMed Pahwa S, Schiltz NK, Ponsky LE, Lu Z, Griswold MA, Gulani V. Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided strategies for detection of prostate cancer in biopsy-naive men. Radiology. 2017;285(1):157–66.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Barocas D, Bitting R, et al. Prostate cancer, version 4.2023, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023;21(10):1067–96.CrossRefPubMed Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, An Y, Barocas D, Bitting R, et al. Prostate cancer, version 4.2023, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023;21(10):1067–96.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Lawhn-Heath C, Salavati A, Behr SC, Rowe SP, Calais J, Fendler WP, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET in prostate cancer. Radiology. 2021;299(2):248–60.CrossRefPubMed Lawhn-Heath C, Salavati A, Behr SC, Rowe SP, Calais J, Fendler WP, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET in prostate cancer. Radiology. 2021;299(2):248–60.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Trabulsi EJ, Rumble RB, Jadvar H, Hope T, Pomper M, Turkbey B, et al. Optimum imaging strategies for advanced prostate cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(17):1963–96.CrossRefPubMed Trabulsi EJ, Rumble RB, Jadvar H, Hope T, Pomper M, Turkbey B, et al. Optimum imaging strategies for advanced prostate cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(17):1963–96.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Jadvar H, Ballas LK, Choyke PL, Fanti S, Gulley JL, Herrmann K, et al. Appropriate use criteria for imaging evaluation of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after definitive primary treatment. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(4):552–62.CrossRefPubMed Jadvar H, Ballas LK, Choyke PL, Fanti S, Gulley JL, Herrmann K, et al. Appropriate use criteria for imaging evaluation of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer after definitive primary treatment. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(4):552–62.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Eder M, Schafer M, Bauder-Wust U, Hull WE, Wangler C, Mier W, et al. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012;23(4):688–97.CrossRefPubMed Eder M, Schafer M, Bauder-Wust U, Hull WE, Wangler C, Mier W, et al. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012;23(4):688–97.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Abghari-Gerst M, Armstrong WR, Nguyen K, Calais J, Czernin J, Lin D, et al. A comprehensive assessment of (68)ga-psma-11 pet in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: results from a prospective multicenter study on 2,005 patients. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(4):567–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Abghari-Gerst M, Armstrong WR, Nguyen K, Calais J, Czernin J, Lin D, et al. A comprehensive assessment of (68)ga-psma-11 pet in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: results from a prospective multicenter study on 2,005 patients. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(4):567–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Vlachostergios PJ, Niaz MJ, Sun M, Mosallaie SA, Thomas C, Christos PJ, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen uptake and survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2021;11: 630589.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vlachostergios PJ, Niaz MJ, Sun M, Mosallaie SA, Thomas C, Christos PJ, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen uptake and survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2021;11: 630589.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Han S, Woo S, Kim YJ, Suh CH. Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET on the management of patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2018;74(2):179–90.CrossRefPubMed Han S, Woo S, Kim YJ, Suh CH. Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET on the management of patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2018;74(2):179–90.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive (68)ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70(6):926–37.CrossRefPubMed Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive (68)ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70(6):926–37.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat von Eyben FE, Picchio M, von Eyben R, Rhee H, Bauman G. (68)Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography/computed tomography for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4(5):686–93.CrossRef von Eyben FE, Picchio M, von Eyben R, Rhee H, Bauman G. (68)Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography/computed tomography for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4(5):686–93.CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Sartor O, de Bono J, Chi KN, Fizazi K, Herrmann K, Rahbar K, et al. Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(12):1091–103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sartor O, de Bono J, Chi KN, Fizazi K, Herrmann K, Rahbar K, et al. Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(12):1091–103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Illuccix. Illuccix (kit for the preparation of gallium Ga 68 gozetotide injection) prescribing information. 2023. Illuccix. Illuccix (kit for the preparation of gallium Ga 68 gozetotide injection) prescribing information. 2023.
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Watabe T, Uemura M, Soeda F, Naka S, Ujike T, Hatano K, et al. High detection rate in [(18)F]PSMA-1007 PET: interim results focusing on biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med. 2021;35(4):523–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Watabe T, Uemura M, Soeda F, Naka S, Ujike T, Hatano K, et al. High detection rate in [(18)F]PSMA-1007 PET: interim results focusing on biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med. 2021;35(4):523–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Tateishi U, Kimura K, Tsuchiya J, Kano D, Watabe T, Nonomura N, et al. Phase I/IIa trial of 18F-prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) 1007 PET/CT in healthy volunteers and prostate cancer patients. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2023;54(3):282–91.CrossRef Tateishi U, Kimura K, Tsuchiya J, Kano D, Watabe T, Nonomura N, et al. Phase I/IIa trial of 18F-prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) 1007 PET/CT in healthy volunteers and prostate cancer patients. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2023;54(3):282–91.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Calais J, Ceci F, et al. PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50(5):1466–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Calais J, Ceci F, et al. PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50(5):1466–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Rauscher I, Kronke M, Konig M, Gafita A, Maurer T, Horn T, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)ga-psma-11 pet/ct and (18)f-psma-1007 pet/ct: frequency of pitfalls and detection efficacy in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(1):51–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rauscher I, Kronke M, Konig M, Gafita A, Maurer T, Horn T, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)ga-psma-11 pet/ct and (18)f-psma-1007 pet/ct: frequency of pitfalls and detection efficacy in biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(1):51–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Kroenke M, Mirzoyan L, Horn T, Peeken JC, Wurzer A, Wester HJ, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-rhPSMA-7 PET/CT in patients with primary and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: frequency of non-tumor-related Uptake and tumor positivity. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(8):1082–8.CrossRefPubMed Kroenke M, Mirzoyan L, Horn T, Peeken JC, Wurzer A, Wester HJ, et al. Matched-pair comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 and (18)F-rhPSMA-7 PET/CT in patients with primary and biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: frequency of non-tumor-related Uptake and tumor positivity. J Nucl Med. 2021;62(8):1082–8.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Arnfield EG, Thomas PA, Roberts MJ, Pelecanos AM, Ramsay SC, Lin CY, et al. Clinical insignificance of [(18)F]PSMA-1007 avid non-specific bone lesions: a retrospective evaluation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(13):4495–507.CrossRefPubMed Arnfield EG, Thomas PA, Roberts MJ, Pelecanos AM, Ramsay SC, Lin CY, et al. Clinical insignificance of [(18)F]PSMA-1007 avid non-specific bone lesions: a retrospective evaluation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(13):4495–507.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Grunig H, Maurer A, Thali Y, Kovacs Z, Strobel K, Burger IA, Muller J. Focal unspecific bone uptake on [(18)F]-PSMA-1007 PET: a multicenter retrospective evaluation of the distribution, frequency, and quantitative parameters of a potential pitfall in prostate cancer imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(13):4483–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Grunig H, Maurer A, Thali Y, Kovacs Z, Strobel K, Burger IA, Muller J. Focal unspecific bone uptake on [(18)F]-PSMA-1007 PET: a multicenter retrospective evaluation of the distribution, frequency, and quantitative parameters of a potential pitfall in prostate cancer imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(13):4483–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Jadvar H, Calais J, Fanti S, Feng F, Greene KL, Gulley JL, et al. Appropriate use criteria for prostate-specific membrane antigen PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(1):59–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jadvar H, Calais J, Fanti S, Feng F, Greene KL, Gulley JL, et al. Appropriate use criteria for prostate-specific membrane antigen PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2022;63(1):59–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
Evaluation of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a Phase 1 clinical study in Japanese patients with primary, recurrent, or suspected recurrent prostate cancer
verfasst von
Anri Inaki
Atsushi Mizokami
Hiroshi Wakabayashi
Kouji Izumi
Yoshifumi Kadono
Tadashi Toyama
Shizuko Takahara
Toshinori Murayama
Seigo Kinuya
Publikationsdatum
16.05.2024
Verlag
Springer Nature Singapore
Erschienen in
Annals of Nuclear Medicine
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Elektronische ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-024-01931-7