Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

The use of PET/CT in prostate cancer

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 21, pages 4–21 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has recently emerged as a promising diagnostic imaging platform for prostate cancer. Several radiolabelled tracers have demonstrated efficacy for cancer detection in various clinical settings. In this review, we aim to illustrate the diverse use of PET/CT with different tracers for the detection of prostate cancer.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE using the terms ‘prostate cancer’, ‘PET’, ‘PET/CT’ and ‘PET/MR’). The current review was limited to 18F-NaF PET/CT, choline-based PET/CT, fluciclovine PET/CT and PSMA-targeted PET/CT, as these modalities have been the most widely adopted.

Results

NaF PET/CT has shown efficacy in detecting bone metastases with high sensitivity, but relatively low specificity. Currently, choline PET/CT has been the most extensively studied modality. Although having superior specificity, choline PET/CT suffers from low sensitivity, especially at low PSA levels. Nevertheless, choline PET/CT was found to significantly improve upon conventional imaging modalities (CIM) in the detection of metastatic lesions at biochemical recurrence (BCR). Newer methods using fluciclovine and PSMA-targeted radiotracers have preliminarily demonstrated great promise in primary and recurrent staging of prostate cancer. However, their superior efficacy awaits confirmation in larger series.

Conclusions

PET/CT has emerged as a promising staging modality for both primary and recurrent prostate cancer. Newer tracers have increased detection accuracies for small, incipient metastatic foci. The clinical implications of these occult PET/CT detected disease foci require organized evaluation. Efforts should be aimed at defining their natural history as well as responsiveness and impact of metastasis-directed therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:7–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;177:2106–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2016;71:618–629.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:746–57.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389:815–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A, Aron M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. Eur Urol. 2015;67:787–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS, et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2015;68:8–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dianat SS, Carter HB, Macura KJ. Performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation and management of clinically low-risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2014;32:39.e1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Schimmoller L, Quentin M, Arsov C, Hiester A, Buchbender C, Rabenalt R, et al. MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:2582–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hovels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, Jager GJ, Strum S, Hoogeveen YL, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2008;63:387–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heesakkers RA, Hovels AM, Jager GJ, van den Bosch HC, Witjes JA, Raat HP, et al. MRI with a lymph-node-specific contrast agent as an alternative to CT scan and lymph-node dissection in patients with prostate cancer: a prospective multicohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:850–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Horiuchi-Suzuki K, Konno A, Ueda M, Fukuda Y, Nishio S, Hashimoto K, et al. Skeletal affinity of Tc(V)-DMS is bone cell mediated and pH dependent. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:388–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cook GJ, Fogelman I. The role of positron emission tomography in the management of bone metastases. Cancer. 2000;88:2927–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Langsteger W, Rezaee A, Pirich C, Beheshti M. 18F-NaF-PET/CT and 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2016;46:491–501.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. von Eyben FE, Kairemo K, Kiljunen T, Joensuu T. Planning of external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer guided by PET/CT. Curr Radiopharm. 2015;8:19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Blau M, Ganatra R, Bender MA. 18 F-fluoride for bone imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 1972;2:31–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Park-Holohan SJ, Blake GM, Fogelman I. Quantitative studies of bone using (18)F-fluoride and (99m)Tc-methylene diphosphonate: evaluation of renal and whole-blood kinetics. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:1037–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Segall G, Delbeke D, Stabin MG, Even-Sapir E, Fair J, Sajdak R, et al. SNM practice guideline for sodium 18F-fluoride PET/CT bone scans 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1813–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Muzahir S, Jeraj R, Liu G, Hall LT, Rio AM, Perk T, et al. Differentiation of metastatic vs degenerative joint disease using semi-quantitative analysis with (18)F-NaF PET/CT in castrate resistant prostate cancer patients. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;5:162–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Araz M, Aras G, Kucuk ON. The role of 18F-NaF PET/CT in metastatic bone disease. J Bone Oncol. 2015;4:92–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I. The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, single- and multi-field-of-view SPECT, 18F-fluoride PET, and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:287–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Fitz F, Nader M, Loidl W, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1766–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Langsteger W, Balogova S, Huchet V, Beheshti M, Paycha F, Egrot C, et al. Fluorocholine (18F) and sodium fluoride (18F) PET/CT in the detection of prostate cancer: prospective comparison of diagnostic performance determined by masked reading. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;55:448–57.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Poulsen MH, Petersen H, Høilund-Carlsen PF, Jakobsen JS, Gerke O, Karstoft J, et al. Spine metastases in prostate cancer: comparison of technetium-99m-MDP whole-body bone scintigraphy, [18F]choline positron emission tomography(PET)/computed tomography (CT) and [18F]NaF PET/CT. BJU Int. 2014;114:818–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kjolhede H, Ahlgren G, Almquist H, Liedberg F, Lyttkens K, Ohlsson T, et al. Combined 18F-fluorocholine and 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging for staging of high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;110:1501–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Hanna L, Duan F, Shields AF, Coleman RE. Impact of 18F-fluoride PET in patients with known prostate cancer: initial results from the national oncologic PET registry. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:574–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jadvar H, Desai B, Ji L, Conti PS, Dorff TB, Groshen SG, et al. Prospective evaluation of 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG PET/CT in detection of occult metastatic disease in biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:637–43.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Apolo AB, Lindenberg L, Shih JH, Mena E, Kim JW, Park JC, et al. Prospective study evaluating Na18F PET/CT in predicting clinical outcomes and survival in advanced prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:886–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yoshimoto M, Waki A, Yonekura Y, Sadato N, Murata T, Omata N, et al. Characterization of acetate metabolism in tumor cells in relation to cell proliferation: acetate metabolism in tumor cells. Nucl Med Biol. 2001;28:117–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Picchio M, Messa C, Landoni C, Gianolli L, Sironi S, Brioschi M, et al. Value of [11C]choline-positron emission tomography for re-staging prostate cancer: a comparison with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. J Urol. 2003;169:1337–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. DeGrado TR, Reiman RE, Price DT, Wang S, Coleman RE. Pharmacokinetics and radiation dosimetry of 18F-fluorocholine. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:92–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Martorana G, Schiavina R, Corti B, Farsad M, Salizzoni E, Brunocilla E, et al. 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for tumor localization of primary prostate cancer in comparison with 12-core biopsy. J Urol. 2006;176:954–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bundschuh RA, Wendl CM, Weirich G, Eiber M, Souvatzoglou M, Treiber U, et al. Tumour volume delineation in prostate cancer assessed by [11C]choline PET/CT: validation with surgical specimens. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:824–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Igerc I, Kohlfurst S, Gallowitsch HJ, Matschnig S, Kresnik E, Gomez-Segovia I, et al. The value of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with elevated PSA-level and negative prostate needle biopsy for localisation of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:976–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Watanabe H, Kanematsu M, Kondo H, Kako N, Yamamoto N, Yamada T, et al. Preoperative detection of prostate cancer: a comparison with 11C-choline PET, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET and MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31:1151–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pinaquy J-B, De Clermont-Galleran H, Pasticier G, Rigou G, Alberti N, Hindie E, et al. Comparative effectiveness of [18F]-fluorocholine PET-CT and pelvic MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging for staging in patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Prostate. 2015;75:323–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hacker A, Jeschke S, Leeb K, Prammer K, Ziegerhofer J, Sega W, et al. Detection of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of [18F]fluorocholine positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and laparoscopic radioisotope guided sentinel lymph node dissection. J Urol. 2006;176:2014–8. discussion8-9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Husarik DB, Miralbell R, Dubs M, John H, Giger OT, Gelet A, et al. Evaluation of [(18)F]-choline PET/CT for staging and restaging of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:253–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P, Picchio M, Corti B, Briganti A, et al. 11C-Choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for preoperative lymph-node staging in intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer: comparison with clinical staging nomograms. Eur Urol. 2008;54:392–401.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Beheshti M, Imamovic L, Broinger G, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Stoiber F, et al. 18F Choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. Radiology. 2010;254:925–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Poulsen MH, Bouchelouche K, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, Petersen H, Gerke O, Steffansen SI, et al. [18F]fluoromethylcholine (FCH) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for lymph node staging of prostate cancer: a prospective study of 210 patients. BJU Int. 2012;110:1666–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Evangelista L, Cimitan M, Zattoni F, Guttilla A, Zattoni F, Saladini G. Comparison between conventional imaging (abdominal-pelvic computed tomography and bone scan) and [(18)F]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging for the initial staging of patients with intermediate- tohigh-risk prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis. Scand J Urol.. 2015;49:345–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Heck MM, Souvatzoglou M, Retz M, Nawroth R, Kubler H, Maurer T, et al. Prospective comparison of computed tomography, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:694–701.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Budiharto T, Joniau S, Lerut E, Van den Bergh L, Mottaghy F, Deroose CM, et al. Prospective evaluation of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the nodal staging of prostate cancer with a high risk of lymph node metastases. Eur Urol. 2011;60:125–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Vag T, Heck MM, Beer AJ, Souvatzoglou M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, et al. Preoperative lymph node staging in patients with primary prostate cancer: comparison and correlation of quantitative imaging parameters in diffusion-weighted imaging and 11C-choline PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:1821–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Schiavina R, Martorana G. The promise of choline-PET/CT in the detection of recurrent prostate cancer: what are the limits of our investigation? Eur Urol. 2013;63:797–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Picchio M, Spinapolice EG, Fallanca F, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, Gianolli L, et al. [11C]Choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:13–26.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wondergem M, van der Zant FM, van der Ploeg T, Knol RJ. A literature review of 18F-fluoride PET/CT and 18F-choline or 11C-choline PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2013;34:935–45.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bertagna F, Abuhilal M, Bosio G, Simeone C, Rossini P, Pizzocaro C, et al. Role of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography in evaluating patients affected by prostate cancer with suspected relapse due to prostate-specific antigen elevation. Jpn J Radiol. 2011;29:394–404.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Reske SN, Blumstein NM, Glatting G. [11C]choline PET/CT imaging in occult local relapse of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:9–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kitajima K, Murphy RC, Nathan MA, Froemming AT, Hagen CE, Takahashi N, et al. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: comparison of 11C-choline PET/CT with pelvic multiparametric MR imaging with endorectal coil. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:223–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Panebianco V, Sciarra A, Lisi D, Galati F, Buonocore V, Catalano C, et al. Prostate cancer: 1HMRS-DCEMR at 3T versus [(18)F]choline PET/CT in the detection of local prostate cancer recurrence in men with biochemical progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:700–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Fanti S, Minozzi S, Castellucci P, Balduzzi S, Herrmann K, Krause BJ, et al. PET/CT with (11)C-choline for evaluation of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: meta-analysis and critical review of available data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:55–69.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Osmonov DK, Heimann D, Janssen I, Aksenov A, Kalz A, Juenemann KP. Sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT regarding the detection of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer recurrence. SpringerPlus.. 2014;3:340.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Passoni NM, Suardi N, Abdollah F, Picchio M, Giovacchini G, Messa C, et al. Utility of [11C]choline PET/CT in guiding lesion-targeted salvage therapies in patients with prostate cancer recurrence localized to a single lymph node at imaging: results from a pathologically validated series. Urol Oncol. 2014;32:38.e9–e16.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Richter JA, Rodriguez M, Rioja J, Penuelas I, Marti-Climent J, Garrastachu P, et al. Dual tracer 11C-choline and FDG-PET in the diagnosis of biochemical prostate cancer relapse after radical treatment. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12:210–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Scattoni V, Picchio M, Suardi N, Messa C, Freschi M, Roscigno M, et al. Detection of lymph-node metastases with integrated [11C]choline PET/CT in patients with PSA failure after radical retropubic prostatectomy: results confirmed by open pelvic-retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Eur Urol. 2007;52:423–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Tilki D, Reich O, Graser A, Hacker M, Silchinger J, Becker AJ, et al. 18F-Fluoroethylcholine PET/CT identifies lymph node metastasis in patients with prostate-specific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy but underestimates its extent. Eur Urol. 2013;63:792–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Alongi F, Comito T, Villa E, Lopci E, Cristina I, Mancosu P, et al. What is the role of [11C]choline PET/CT in decision making strategy before post-operative salvage radiation therapy in prostate cancer patients? Acta Oncol. 2014;53:990–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Souvatzoglou M, Krause BJ, Purschel A, Thamm R, Schuster T, Buck AK, et al. Influence of (11)C-choline PET/CT on the treatment planning for salvage radiation therapy in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;99:193–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Wurschmidt F, Petersen C, Wahl A, Dahle J, Kretschmer M. [18F]fluoroethylcholine-PET/CT imaging for radiation treatment planning of recurrent and primary prostate cancer with dose escalation to PET/CT-positive lymph nodes. Radiat Oncol. 2011;6:44.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Picchio M, Berardi G, Fodor A, Busnardo E, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, et al. (11)C-Choline PET/CT as a guide to radiation treatment planning of lymph-node relapses in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:1270–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Lahmer G, Lotter M, Kreppner S, Fietkau R, Strnad V. Protocol-based image-guided salvage brachytherapy. Early results in patients with local failure of prostate cancer after radiation therapy. Strahlenther Onkol. 2013;189:668–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Karnes RJ, Murphy CR, Bergstralh EJ, DiMonte G, Cheville JC, Lowe VJ, et al. Salvage lymph node dissection for prostate cancer nodal recurrence detected by 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. J Urol. 2015;193:111–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Rigatti P, Suardi N, Briganti A, Da Pozzo LF, Tutolo M, Villa L, et al. Pelvic/retroperitoneal salvage lymph node dissection for patients treated with radical prostatectomy with biochemical recurrence and nodal recurrence detected by [11C]Choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Urol. 2011;60:935–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A, Di Trapani E, Scattoni V, Vizziello D, et al. Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol. 2015;67:299–309.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Rischke HC, Schultze-Seemann W, Wieser G, Krönig M, Drendel V, Stegmaier P, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy after salvage lymph node dissection because of nodal relapse of prostate cancer versus salvage lymph node dissection only. Strahlenther Onkol. 2015;191:310–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Fuccio C, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, Guidalotti PL, Gavaruzzi G, Montini GC, et al. Role of 11C-choline PET/CT in the re-staging of prostate cancer patients with biochemical relapse and negative results at bone scintigraphy. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:e893–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ceci F, Castellucci P, Graziani T, Schiavina R, Chondrogiannis S, Bonfiglioli R, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT identifies osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:e265–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Evangelista L, Guttilla A, Zattoni F, Muzzio PC, Zattoni F. Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2013;63:1040–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Umbehr MH, Muntener M, Hany T, Sulser T, Bachmann LM. The role of 11C-choline and 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2013;64:106–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Evangelista L, Briganti A, Fanti S, Joniau S, Reske S, Schiavina R, et al. New clinical indications for (18)F/(11)C-choline, new tracers for positron emission tomography and a promising hybrid device for prostate cancer staging: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2016;70:161–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, Bettinardi V, Gianolli L, Scattoni V, et al. Predictive factors of [(11)C]choline PET/CT in patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:301–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Mitchell CR, Lowe VJ, Rangel LJ, Hung JC, Kwon ED, Karnes RJ. Operational characteristics of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for prostate cancer with biochemical recurrence after initial treatment. J Urol. 2013;189:1308–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Krause BJ, Souvatzoglou M, Tuncel M, Herrmann K, Buck AK, Praus C, et al. The detection rate of [11C]choline-PET/CT depends on the serum PSA-value in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:18–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Pfister D, Bolla M, Briganti A, Carroll P, Cozzarini C, Joniau S, et al. Early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2014;65:1034–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Mamede M, Ceci F, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, Fuccio C, Nanni C, et al. The role of 11C-choline PET imaging in the early detection of recurrence in surgically treated prostate cancer patients with very low PSA level <0.5 ng/mL. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38:e342–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Castellucci P, Ceci F, Graziani T, Schiavina R, Brunocilla E, Mazzarotto R, et al. Early biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy: which prostate cancer patients may benefit from a restaging 11C-Choline PET/CT scan before salvage radiation therapy? Journal of nuclear medicine: official publication. Soc Nucl Med. 2014;55:1424–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Rodado-Marina S, Coronado-Poggio M, Garcia-Vicente AM, Garcia-Garzon JR, Alonso-Farto JC, de la Jara AC, et al. Clinical utility of (18)F-fluorocholine positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in biochemical relapse of prostate cancer after radical treatment: results of a multicentre study. BJU Int. 2015;115:874–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Zheng QH, Gardner TA, Raikwar S, Kao C, Stone KL, Martinez TD, et al. [11C]Choline as a PET biomarker for assessment of prostate cancer tumor models. Bioorg Med Chem. 2004;12:2887–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Emonds KM, Swinnen JV, van Weerden WM, Vanderhoydonc F, Nuyts J, Mortelmans L, et al. Do androgens control the uptake of 18F-FDG, 11C-choline and 11C-acetate in human prostate cancer cell lines? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1842–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Hara T, Bansal A, DeGrado TR. Effect of hypoxia on the uptake of [methyl-3H]choline, [1-14C] acetate and [18F]FDG in cultured prostate cancer cells. Nucl Med Biol. 2006;33:977–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, Scattoni V, Bettinardi V, Cozzarini C, et al. [(11)C]choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1065–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Fuccio C, Schiavina R, Castellucci P, Rubello D, Martorana G, Celli M, et al. Androgen deprivation therapy influences the uptake of 11C-choline in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: the preliminary results of a sequential PET/CT study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1985–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Ceci F, Schiavina R, Castellucci P, Brunocilla E, Fuccio C, Colletti PM, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT scan in patients with prostate cancer treated with intermittent ADT: A sequential PET/CT study. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38:e279–e82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. De Giorgi U, Caroli P, Burgio SL, Menna C, Conteduca V, Bianchi E, et al. Early outcome prediction on 18F-fluorocholine PET/CT in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with abiraterone. Oncotarget.. 2014;5:12448–58.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Challapalli A, Barwick T, Tomasi G, O’Doherty M, Contractor K, Stewart S, et al. Exploring the potential of [11C]choline-PET/CT as a novel imaging biomarker for predicting early treatment response in prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2014;35:20–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Beheshti M, Haim S, Zakavi R, Steinmair M, Waldenberger P, Kunit T, et al. Impact of 18F-choline PET/CT in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: influence of androgen deprivation therapy and correlation with PSA kinetics. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:833–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Giovacchini G. Do we have to withdraw antiandrogenic therapy in prostate cancer patients before PET/CT with [11C]choline? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1964–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Garcia-Parra R, Briganti A, Abdollah F, Gianolli L, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT predicts prostate cancer-specific survival in patients with biochemical failure during androgen-deprivation therapy. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:233–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Ceci F, Herrmann K, Castellucci P, Graziani T, Bluemel C, Schiavina R, et al. Impact of 11C-choline PET/CT on clinical decision making in recurrent prostate cancer: results from a retrospective two-centre trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:2222–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Soyka JD, Muster MA, Schmid DT, Seifert B, Schick U, Miralbell R, et al. Clinical impact of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:936–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Huang C, McConathy J. Radiolabeled amino acids for oncologic imaging. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1007–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Nanni C, Schiavina R, Rubello D, Ambrosini V, Brunocilla E, Martorana G, et al. The detection of disease relapse after radical treatment for prostate cancer: is anti-3-18F-FACBC PET/CT a promising option? Nucl Med Commun. 2013;34:831–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. McConathy J, Voll RJ, Yu W, Crowe RJ, Goodman MM. Improved synthesis of anti-[18F]FACBC: improved preparation of labeling precursor and automated radiosynthesis. Appl Radiat Isot. 2003;58:657–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Schuster DM, Nanni C, Fanti S, Oka S, Okudaira H, Inoue Y, et al. Anti-1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid: physiologic uptake patterns, incidental findings, and variants that may simulate disease. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1986–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Turkbey B, Mena E, Shih J, Pinto PA, Merino MJ, Lindenberg ML, et al. Localized prostate cancer detection with 18F FACBC PET/CT: comparison with MR imaging and histopathologic analysis. Radiology. 2014;270:849–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Schuster DM, Taleghani PA, Nieh PT, Master VA, Amzat R, Savir-Baruch B, et al. Characterization of primary prostate carcinoma by anti-1-amino-2-[(18)F] -fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid (anti-3-[(18)F] FACBC) uptake. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;3:85–96.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Suzuki H, Inoue Y, Fujimoto H, Yonese J, Tanabe K, Fukasawa S, et al. Diagnostic performance and safety of NMK36 (trans-1-amino-3-[18F]fluorocyclobutanecarboxylic acid)-PET/CT in primary prostate cancer: multicenter Phase IIb clinical trial. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2016;46:152–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Schuster DM, Nieh PT, Jani AB, Amzat R, Bowman FD, Halkar RK, et al. Anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and (111)In-capromab pendetide single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography for recurrent prostate carcinoma: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol. 2014;191:1446–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Odewole OA, Tade FI, Nieh PT, Savir-Baruch B, Jani AB, Master VA, et al. Recurrent prostate cancer detection with anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC PET/CT: comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1773–83.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Nanni C, Zanoni L, Pultrone C, Schiavina R, Brunocilla E, Lodi F, et al. 18)F-FACBC (anti1-amino-3-(18)F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid) versus (11)C-choline PET/CT in prostate cancer relapse: results of a prospective trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1601–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Ren J, Yuan L, Wen G, Yang J. The value of anti-1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol. 2016;57:487–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Akin-Akintayo OO, Jani AB, Odewole O, Tade FI, Nieh PT, Master VA, et al. Change in salvage radiotherapy management based on guidance with FACBC (Fluciclovine) PET/CT in postprostatectomy recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42:e22–e8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Maurer T, Eiber M, Schwaiger M, Gschwend JE. Current use of PSMA-PET in prostate cancer management. Nat Rev Urol. 2016;13:226–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, Heston WD, Cordon-Cardo C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3:81–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Perner S, Hofer MD, Kim R, Shah RB, Li H, Moller P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression as a predictor of prostate cancer progression. Hum Pathol. 2007;38:696–701.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Wang H, Byun Y, Barinka C, Pullambhatla M, Bhang HE, Fox JJ, et al. Bioisosterism of urea-based GCPII inhibitors: synthesis and structure-activity relationship studies. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2010;20:392–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. 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;23:688–97.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71:618–29.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Bonekamp D, Jacobs MA, El-Khouli R, Stoianovici D, Macura KJ. Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics. 2011;31:677–703.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Eiber M, Nekolla SG, Maurer T, Weirich G, Wester HJ, Schwaiger M. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/MR with multimodality image analysis for primary prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:1769–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Martinez-Moeller A, Furst S, Holzapfel K, Maurer T, et al. PET/MR in prostate cancer: technical aspects and potential diagnostic value. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:S79–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Rauscher I, et al. Simultaneous 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2016;70:829–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Weirich G, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of (68)Gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2016;195:1436–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Sweat SD, Pacelli A, Murphy GP, Bostwick DG. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression is greatest in prostate adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases. Urology. 1998;52:637–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Kabasakal L, Demirci E, Ocak M, Akyel R, Nematyazar J, Aygun A, et al. Evaluation of PSMA PET/CT imaging using a 68Ga-HBED-CC ligand in patients with prostate cancer and the value of early pelvic imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2015;36:582–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Chakraborty PS, Kumar R, Tripathi M, Das CJ, Bal C. Detection of brain metastasis with 68Ga-labeled PSMA ligand PET/CT: a novel radiotracer for imaging of prostate carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:328–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Budaus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G, Michl U, Heinzer H, Huland H, et al. Initial experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging in high-risk prostate cancer patients prior to radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69:393–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Herlemann A, Wenter V, Kretschmer A, Thierfelder KM, Bartenstein P, Faber C, et al. 68Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography/computed tomography provides accurate staging of lymph node regions prior to lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2016;70:553–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:197–209.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70:926–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Schlemmer HP, Fenchel M, Eder M, Eisenhut M, et al. Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:887–97.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, Tang R, Ho B, Nguyen Q, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising psa after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1185–90.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Pfister D, Porres D, Heidenreich A, Heidegger I, Knuechel R, Steib F, et al. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer lesions before salvage lymphadenectomy is more accurate with (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC than with (18)F-Fluoroethylcholine PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1410–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid (6)(8)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:668–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Stephenson AJ, Shariat SF, Zelefsky MJ, Kattan MW, Butler EB, Teh BS, et al. Salvage radiotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2004;291:1325–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Freedland SJ, Rumble RB, Finelli A, Chen RC, Slovin S, Stein MN, et al. Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:3892–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Evans MJ, Smith-Jones PM, Wongvipat J, Navarro V, Kim S, Bander NH, et al. Noninvasive measurement of androgen receptor signaling with a positron-emitting radiopharmaceutical that targets prostate-specific membrane antigen. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA.. 2011;108:9578–82.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Maurer T, Weirich G, Schottelius M, Weineisen M, Frisch B, Okur A, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen-radioguided surgery for metastatic lymph nodes in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;68:530–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Sterzing F, Kratochwil C, Fiedler H, Katayama S, Habl G, Kopka K, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a new technique with high potential for the radiotherapeutic management of prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:34–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Osborne JR, Green DA, Spratt DE, Lyashchenko S, Fareedy SB, Robinson BD, et al. A prospective pilot study of (89)Zr-J591/prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in men with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2014;191:1439–45.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Szabo Z, Mena E, Rowe SP, Plyku D, Nidal R, Eisenberger MA, et al. Initial evaluation of [(18)F]DCFPyL for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET imaging of prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17:565–74.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Gorin MA, Pomper MG, Rowe SP. PSMA-targeted imaging of prostate cancer: the best is yet to come. BJU Int. 2016;117:715–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Dietlein M, Kobe C, Kuhnert G, Stockter S, Fischer T, Schomacker K, et al. Comparison of [(18)F]DCFPyL and [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET imaging in patients with relapsed prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015;17:575–84.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  136. Chen Y, Pullambhatla M, Foss CA, Byun Y, Nimmagadda S, Senthamizhchelvan S, et al. 2-(3-{1-Carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-3-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl}-ureido)-pen tanedioic acid, [18F]DCFPyL, a PSMA-based PET imaging agent for prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:7645–53.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  137. Rowe SP, Gage KL, Faraj SF, Macura KJ, Cornish TC, Gonzalez-Roibon N, et al. (1)(8)F-DCFBC PET/CT for PSMA-based detection and characterization of primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1003–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Rowe SP, Macura KJ, Ciarallo A, Mena E, Blackford A, Nadal R, et al. Comparison of prostate-specific membrane antigen-based 18F-DCFBC PET/CT to conventional imaging modalities for detection of hormone-naive and castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:46–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Rowe SP, Macura KJ, Mena E, Blackford AL, Nadal R, Antonarakis ES, et al. PSMA-based [(18)F]DCFPyL PET/CT is superior to conventional imaging for lesion detection in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2016;18:411–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  140. Rowe SP, Mana-Ay M, Javadi MS, Szabo Z, Leal JP, Pomper MG, et al. PSMA-based detection of prostate cancer bone lesions with (1)(8)F-DCFPyL PET/CT: a sensitive alternative to ((9)(9)m)Tc-MDP bone scan and Na(1)(8)F PET/CT? Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;14:e115–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Giesel FL, Kesch C, Yun M, Cardinale J, Haberkorn U, Kopka K, et al. 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT detects micrometastases in a patient with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;15:e497–e499.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Harada N, Kimura H, Onoe S, Watanabe H, Matsuoka D, Arimitsu K, et al. Synthesis and biologic evaluation of novel 18F-labeled probes targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen for PET of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:1978–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Kelly J, Amor-Coarasa A, Nikolopoulou A, Kim D, Williams C Jr, Ponnala S, et al. Synthesis and pre-clinical evaluation of a new class of high-affinity 18F-labeled PSMA ligands for detection of prostate cancer by PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:647–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Kahkonen E, Jambor I, Kemppainen J, Lehtio K, Gronroos TJ, Kuisma A, et al. In vivo imaging of prostate cancer using [68Ga]-labeled bombesin analog BAY86-7548. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:5434–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Persson M, Madsen J, Ostergaard S, Jensen MM, Jorgensen JT, Juhl K, et al. Quantitative PET of human urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor with 64Cu-DOTA-AE105: implications for visualizing cancer invasion. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:138–45.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Murphy DG, Sweeney CJ, Tombal B. “Gotta catch ‘em All”, or do we? Pokemet approach to metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;72:1–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  147. Rini BI, Dorff TB, Elson P, Rodriguez CS, Shepard D, Wood L, et al. Active surveillance in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a prospective, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1317–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Ost P, Jereczek-Fossa BA, As NV, Zilli T, Muacevic A, Olivier K, et al. Progression-free survival following stereotactic body radiotherapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer treatment-naive recurrence: a multi-institutional analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;69:9–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  149. Metcalfe MJ, Smaldone MC, Lin DW, Aparicio AM, Chapin BF. Role of radical prostatectomy in metastatic prostate cancer: a review. Urol Oncol. 2017;35:125–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  150. Fendler WP, Calais J, Allen-Auerbach M, Bluemel C, Eberhardt N, Emmett L, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT interobserver agreement for prostate cancer assessments: an international multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2017.

  151. Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Ceci F, Cho S, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1014–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Beauregard JM, Williams SG, DeGrado TR, Roselt P, Hicks RJ. Original article: pilot comparison of 18F-fluorocholine and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT with conventional imaging in prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2010;54:325–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Van Den Bergh L, Koole M, Isebaert S, Joniau S, Deroose CM, Oyen R, et al. Is there an additional value of 11C-Choline PET-CT to T2-weighted MRI images in the localization of intraprostatic tumor nodules? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:1486–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Hijazi S, Meller B, Leitsmann C, Strauss A, Meller J, Ritter CO, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for nodal oligometastatic prostate cancer detected by 68Ga-PSMA-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography. Prostate. 2015;75:1934–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kratochwil C, Benesova M, Eder M, Neels OC, et al. The theranostic PSMA ligand PSMA-617 in the diagnosis of prostate cancer by PET/CT: biodistribution in humans, radiation dosimetry, and first evaluation of tumor lesions. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1697–705.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Unit 1373, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Roger Li & Brian F. Chapin

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Gregory C. Ravizzini

  3. The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Michael A. Gorin

  4. Department of Urology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Tobias Maurer

  5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Matthias Eiber

  6. Department of Urology, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Matthew R. Cooperberg

  7. Department of Urology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Mehrdad Alemozzaffar

  8. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Matthew K. Tollefson

  9. Department of Urology, Louisiana State University, New Orleans, LA, USA

    Scott E. Delacroix

Authors
  1. Roger Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gregory C. Ravizzini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael A. Gorin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tobias Maurer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matthias Eiber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Matthew R. Cooperberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mehrdad Alemozzaffar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Matthew K. Tollefson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Scott E. Delacroix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Brian F. Chapin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger Li.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

MAG has served as a consultant and received research support from Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the licensee of 18F-DCFPyL.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, R., Ravizzini, G.C., Gorin, M.A. et al. The use of PET/CT in prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 21, 4–21 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-017-0007-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-017-0007-8

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links