Nuklearmedizin
DOI: 10.1055/a-0895-5078
Case Report
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

PSMA-ligand PET allows a more accurate therapeutic response evaluation of bone metastases in prostate cancer compared to computed tomography

Viktor Fech
,
Ian Alberts
,
Axel Rominger
,
Ali Afshar-Oromieh
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
13 May 2019 (online)

Abstract

A patient with bone metastases of prostate cancer was referred for 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. Compared to a 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT four months previously, the CT-component of the current PET/CT showed morphological progress in all lesions despite continuous therapy with docetaxel and denosumab. Contrarily, the PET-component showed a reduction of tracer-uptake, which correlated with PSA decrease between the two PET/CT-scans (16.2 ng/ml vs. 3.1 ng/ml). This case highlights 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT as a promising tool for therapy monitoring of prostate cancer and could serve as a basis for a novel monitoring strategy. Volume progress shown by CT must not be classified as tumor progress, but as bone remodeling following effective therapy.

 
  • References

  • 1 Scher HI, Morris MJ, Basch E. et al. End Points and Outcomes in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: From Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2011; 29: 3695-3704
  • 2 Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J. et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). European Journal of Cancer 2009; 45: 228-247
  • 3 Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: A review of validation studies on tumour assessment. European Journal of Cancer 2006; 42: 1031-1039
  • 4 Bäuerle T, Semmler W. Imaging response to systemic therapy for bone metastases. European Radiology 2009; 19: 2495-2507
  • 5 Afshar-Oromieh A, Holland-Letz T, Giesel FL. et al. Diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 (HBED-CC) PET/CT in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: evaluation in 1007 patients. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2017; 44: 1258-1268