Abstract
Purpose
Our meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT vs. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer.
Methods
We searched for relevant articles in PubMed and Embase until February 2022. Studies evaluating head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in men with prostate cancer biochemical recurrence were included. The quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.
Results
A total of 5 studies with 219 patients were included in the analysis. The pooled overall detection rates of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in detecting recurrent PCa after definitive treatment were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.65–1.00), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.77–1.00), while the detection rates were 0.20 (95% CI: 0.05–0.41) and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.10–0.53) in local recurrence, 0.51 (95% CI: 0.33–0.69) and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.44–0.61) in lymph node metastasis, 0.18 (95% CI: 0.07–0.33) and 0.20 (95% CI: 0.09–0.35) in bone metastasis. There was no significant difference between the two imaging modalities in the overall detection rate (P = 0.82). In addition, detection rates were also not significantly different in local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, or bone metastasis (P = 0.54, 1.00, 0.82).
Conclusions
68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI seem to have equivalent performance in detecting biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer. However, the results of the meta-analysis were drawn from studies with small samples. Further larger studies in this setting are warranted.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 4 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $64.75 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–49.
Tsechelidis I, Vrachimis A. PSMA PET in Imaging Prostate Cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12:831429.
Cary KC, Punnen S, Odisho AY, Litwin MS, Saigal CS, Cooperberg MR. Nationally representative trends and geographic variation in treatment of localized prostate cancer: the Urologic Diseases in America project. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015;18:149–54.
Han M, Partin AW, Pound CR, Epstein JI, Walsh PC. Long-term biochemical disease-free and cancer-specific survival following anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. The 15-year Johns Hopkins experience. Urol Clin North Am. 2001;28:555–65.
Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, D’Amico AV, Dmochowski RR, et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007;177:540–5.
Roach M 3rd, Hanks G, Thames H Jr, Schellhammer P, Shipley WU, Sokol GH, et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:965–74.
Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, Williams M, Udovicich C, Vela I, et al. Gallium-68 Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Advanced Prostate Cancer-Updated Diagnostic Utility, Sensitivity, Specificity, and Distribution of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen-avid Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77:403–17.
Venkatesan AM, Mudairu-Dawodu E, Duran C, Stafford RJ, Yan Y, Wei W, et al. Detecting recurrent prostate Cancer using multiparametric MRI, influence of PSA and Gleason grade. Cancer Imaging. 2021;21:3.
Masi M, Landoni V, Faiella A, Farneti A, Marzi S, Guerrisi M, et al. Comparison of rigid and deformable coregistration between mpMRI and CT images in radiotherapy of prostate bed cancer recurrence. Phys Med. 2021;92:32–9.
Alfarone A, Panebianco V, Schillaci O, Salciccia S, Cattarino S, Mariotti G, et al. Comparative analysis of multiparametric magnetic resonance and PET-CT in the management of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2012;84:109–21.
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;38:1963–96.
Al-Bayati M, Grueneisen J, Lütje S, Sawicki LM, Suntharalingam S, Tschirdewahn S, et al. Integrated 68Gallium Labelled Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-11 Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging Enhances Discriminatory Power of Multi-Parametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Urol Int. 2018;100:164–71.
Liu FY, Sheng TW, Tseng JR, Yu KJ, Tsui KH, Pang ST, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) fusion imaging in prostate cancer: PET-CT vs PET-MRI. Br J Radiol. 2021:20210728.
Sun J, Lin Y, Wei X, Ouyang J, Huang Y, Ling Z. Performance of 18F-DCFPyL PET/CT Imaging in Early Detection of Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol. 2021;11:649171.
Kesch C, Vinsensia M, Radtke JP, Schlemmer HP, Heller M, Ellert E, et al. Intraindividual Comparison of (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, Multiparametric MRI, and Radical Prostatectomy Specimens in Patients with Primary Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective, Proof-of-Concept Study. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1805–10.
FDA Approves First PSMA-Targeted PET Imaging Drug for Men with Prostate Cancer 2020. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-psma-targeted-pet-imaging-drug-men-prostate-cancer.
Almansory KO, Fraioli F. Combined PET/MRI in brain glioma imaging. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2019;80:380–6.
Verburg FA, Pfestroff A. Imaging: PSMA PET-CT in initial prostate cancer staging. Nat Rev Urol. 2016;13:498–9.
Bianchi L, Schiavina R, Borghesi M, Ceci F, Angiolini A, Chessa F, et al. How does (68) Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography impact the management of patients with prostate cancer recurrence after surgery? Int J Urol. 2019;26:804–11.
Bashir U, Tree A, Mayer E, Levine D, Parker C, Dearnaley D, et al. Impact of Ga-68-PSMA PET/CT on management in prostate cancer patients with very early biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:901–7.
Barbaud M, Frindel M, Ferrer L, Le Thiec M, Rusu D, Rauscher A, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT study in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence and non-contributive 18F-Choline PET-CT: Impact on therapeutic decision-making and biomarker changes. Prostate. 2019;79:454–61.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–36.
Lütje S, Cohnen J, Gomez B, Grüneisen J, Sawicki L, Rübben H, et al. Integrated (68)Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA-PET/MRI in patients with suspected recurrent prostate cancer. Nuklearmedizin. 2017;56:73–81.
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.
Domachevsky L, Bernstine H, Goldberg N, Nidam M, Stern D, Sosna J, et al. Early (68)GA-PSMA PET/MRI acquisition: assessment of lesion detectability and PET metrics in patients with prostate cancer undergoing same-day late PET/CT. Clin Radio. 2017;72:944–50.
Jentjens S, Mai C, Ahmadi Bidakhvidi N, De Coster L, Mertens N, Koole M, et al. Prospective comparison of simultaneous [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MR versus PET/CT in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Eur Radio. 2022;32:901–11.
Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Afshar-Oromieh A, Roethke MC, Hadaschik BA, Gleave M, et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy is at risk to be missed in (68)Ga-PSMA-11-PET of PET/CT and PET/MRI: comparison with mpMRI integrated in simultaneous PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:776–87.
Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Hadaschik BA, Kopp-Schneider A, Eder M, Kopka K, et al. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA PET/MRI and (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of lymph node and bone metastases of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:70–83.
Uprimny C, Bayerschmidt S, Kroiss AS, Fritz J, Nilica B, Svirydenka H, et al. Early injection of furosemide increases detection rate of local recurrence in prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence referred for (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:1550–7.
Duan H, Baratto L, Hatami N, Liang T, Mari Aparici C, Davidzon GA, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA11 PET/CT for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: Influence of dual-time and PMT- vs SiPM-based detectors. Transl Oncol. 2022;15:101293.
Plaza López PJ, Puertas E, Aguiló JJ, Suarez-Piñera M, Domenech B, Mestre-Fusco A, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in patients with occult biochemical recurrence of prostate carcinoma and negative (18)F-Choline PET/CT. Preliminary assessment of its clinical use. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2021;45:353–8.
Tseng JR, Yu KJ, Liu FY, Yang LY, Hong JH, Yen TC, et al. Comparison between (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Formos Med Assoc. 2021;120:688–96.
Yuminaga Y, Rothe C, Kam J, Beattie K, Arianayagam M, Bui C, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus CT and bone scan for investigation of PSA failure post radical prostatectomy. Asian J Urol. 2021;8:170–5.
Bagade S, Fowler KJ, Schwarz JK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F. PET/MRI evaluation of gynecologic malignancies and prostate cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2015;45:293–303.
Guberina N, Hetkamp P, Ruebben H, Fendler W, Grueneisen J, Suntharalingam S, et al. Whole-body integrated [(68)Ga]PSMA-11-PET/MR imaging in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: comparison with whole-body PET/CT as the standard of references. Mol Imaging Biol. 2020;22:788–96.
Eissa A, Elsherbiny A, Coelho RF, Rassweiler J, Davis JW, Porpiglia F, et al. The role of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT scan in biochemical recurrence after primary treatment for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2018;70:462–78.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
HH and BL conceived and designed the study, which were proofed by FY, SS and DH collected and analyzed the data. HH and FY wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Huo, H., Shen, S., He, D. et al. Head-to-head comparison of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in the detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: summary of head-to-head comparison studies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 26, 16–24 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-022-00581-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-022-00581-y
This article is cited by
-
Drug conjugates for the treatment of lung cancer: from drug discovery to clinical practice
Experimental Hematology & Oncology (2024)
-
The EANM Focus 5 consensus on ‘molecular imaging and theranostics in prostate cancer’: the future begins today
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2024)
-
The superior detection rate of total-body [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT compared to short axial field-of-view [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for early recurrent prostate cancer patients with PSA < 0.2 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2024)
-
Diagnostic accuracy of fully hybrid [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI and [68Ga]Ga-RM2 PET/MRI in patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: a prospective single-center phase II clinical trial
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2024)
-
Understanding biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: trust biology, not a number
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases (2023)