Download PDF
Der Nuklearmediziner 2006; 29(3): 142-150
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-942132
Funktionell-morphologische Kombinationsbildgebung

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

PET und PET/CT in der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms

PET and PET/CT for Imaging of Prostate CancerB. Scher1 , M. Seitz2 , R. Tiling1 , W. Albinger1 , S. Banac1 , M. Scherr3 , S. Dresel1
  • 1Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • 2Urologische Klinik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
  • 3Institut für Klinische Radiologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
15 September 2006 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Übersichtsartikel befasst sich mit dem Nutzen der PET und PET/CT in der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms. Die bisher am häufigsten verwendeten PET-Tracer zur Detektion von Prostatakarzinomen sind 11C-Acetat sowie 11C- oder 18F-markiertes Cholin. Die derzeit verfügbare Fachliteratur, die sich mit der Leistungsfähigkeit der PET und PET/CT in der Primärtumor- und Metastasendiagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms befasst, wird diskutiert. Darüber hinaus werden eigene vorläufige Studienergebnisse im Hinblick auf die Leistungsfähigkeit von 11C-Cholin-PET und -PET/CT in der Diagnostik von Patienten mit Verdacht auf ein Prostatakarzinom präsentiert. Die Prävalenz des Prostatakarzinoms lag bei den 43 in die Studie eingeschlossenen Patienten bei 55,8 %. PET und PET/CT zeigten hierbei in der Detektion des Primärkarzinoms eine Sensitivität von 88 % bei einer Spezifität von 63 %. Die Sensitivität in der Metastasendetektion lag in einer patientenbasierten Auswertung bei 77 %. Hierbei zeigten sich keine falsch-positiven Resultate. Die möglichen Vorteile und Limitationen kombinierter PET/CT-Geräte im Vergleich zu PET-Einzelgeräten werden ebenfalls erörtert. PET und PET/CT sind die derzeit einzigen bildgebenden Verfahren, die sowohl funktionelle Informationen über den Primärtumor als auch dessen Metastasen bereitstellen. Dies unterscheidet die PET von der MRT in Kombination mit der Magnetresonanzspektroskopie, einem konkurrierenden Verfahren. Unsere eigenen vorläufigen Daten, sowie die nach wie vor limitierte verfügbare wissenschaftliche Literatur legen nahe, dass PET und PET/CT sich in der Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms als nützlich erweisen könnten.

Abstract

This review article provides an overview of the current literature data regarding the value of PET and PET/CT for imaging of prostate cancer. Most widely used PET tracers for prostate cancer imaging are 11C-acetate and 11C- or 18F-labeled choline. Available literature data on the performance of PET and PET/CT in the detection of the primary malignancy as well as local or distant metastases are presented and discussed. In addition, our own preliminary results regarding the diagnostic efficacy of 11C-choline PET and PET/CT in 43 patients with suspected prostate cancer are provided. The prevalence of prostate cancer in this patient sample was 55.8 %. PET and PET/CT showed a sensitivity of 88 % with a specificity of 63 % in the detection of the primary prostate cancer. The sensitivity in the detection of metastatic spread was 77 % and no false-positives were found. The possible value and limitations of combined PET/CT systems when compared to stand alone PET scanners are discussed. PET and PET/CT is at present the single imaging modality providing functional information not only regarding the primary malignancy but also its metastases. This unique feature distinguishes PET from MRI complemented with magnetic resonance spectroscopy - a competing procedure. Our own results as well as the still limited literature data suggest, that PET and PET/CT may prove to be useful methods for imaging of prostate cancer.

Schlüsselwörter

PET - 11C-Cholin - Prostatakarzinom

Key words

PET - 11C-choline - prostate cancer

Literatur

  • 1 Sarma A V, Schottenfeld D. Prostate cancer incidence, mortality, and survival trends in the United States: 1981-2001.  Semin Urol Oncol. 2002;  1 3-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Scardino P T. Early detection of prostate cancer.  Urol Clin North Am. 1989;  4 635-655
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wefer A E, Hricak H, Vigneron D B, Coakley F V, Lu Y, Wefer J, Mueller-Lisse U, Carroll P R, Kurhanewicz J. Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology.  J Urol. 2000;  2 400-404
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cornud F, Belin X, Piron D, Chretien Y, Flam T, Casanova J M, Helenon O, Mejean A, Thiounn N, Moreau J F. Color Doppler-guided prostate biopsies in 591 patients with an elevated serum PSA level: impact on Gleason score for nonpalpable lesions.  Urology. 1997;  5 709-715
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Halpern E J, Verkh L, Forsberg F, Gomella L G, Mattrey R F, Goldberg B B. Initial experience with contrast-enhanced sonography of the prostate.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;  6 1575-1580
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Wijkstra H, Wink M H, de la Rosette J J. Contrast specific imaging in the detection and localization of prostate cancer.  World J Urol. 2004;  5 346-350
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Heuck A, Scheidler J, Sommer B, Graser A, Muller-Lisse U G, Massmann J. [MR imaging of prostate cancer].  Radiologe. 2003;  6 464-473
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wilkinson B A, Hamdy F C. State-of-the-art staging in prostate cancer.  BJU Int. 2001;  5 423-430
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Smith Jr  J A, Scardino P T, Resnick M I, Hernandez A D, Rose S C, Egger M J. Transrectal ultrasound versus digital rectal examination for the staging of carcinoma of the prostate: results of a prospective, multi-institutional trial.  J Urol. 1997;  3 902-906
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Liebross R H, Pollack A, Lankford S P, Zagars G K, Eschenbach A C von, Geara F B. Transrectal ultrasound for staging prostate carcinoma prior to radiation therapy: an evaluation based on disease outcome.  Cancer. 1999;  7 1577-1585
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Engelbrecht M R, Jager G J, Laheij R J, Verbeek A L, van Lier H J, Barentsz J O. Local staging of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis.  Eur Radiol. 2002;  9 2294-2302
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Mueller-Lisse U, Mueller-Lisse U, Scheidler J, Klein G, Reiser M. Reproducibility of image interpretation in MRI of the prostate: application of the sextant framework by two different radiologists.  Eur Radiol. 2005;  9 1826-1833
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D B, Hricak H, Narayan P, Carroll P, Nelson S J. Three-dimensional H-1 MR spectroscopic imaging of the in situ human prostate with high (0.24-0.7-cm3) spatial resolution.  Radiology. 1996;  3 795-805
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Heerschap A, Jager G J, van der Graaf M, Barentsz J O, Ruijs S H. Proton MR spectroscopy of the normal human prostate with an endorectal coil and a double spin-echo pulse sequence.  Magn Reson Med. 1997;  2 204-213
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Mueller-Lisse U G, Vigneron D B, Hricak H, Swanson M G, Carroll P R, Bessette A, Scheidler J, Srivastava A, Males R G, Cha I, Kurhanewicz J. Localized prostate cancer: effect of hormone deprivation therapy measured by using combined three-dimensional 1H MR spectroscopy and MR imaging: clinicopathologic case-controlled study.  Radiology. 2001;  2 380-390
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Costello L C, Franklin R B, Narayan P. Citrate in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.  Prostate. 1999;  3 237-245
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Qayyum A, Coakley F V, Lu Y, Olpin J D, Wu L, Yeh B M, Carroll P R, Kurhanewicz J. Organ-confined prostate cancer: effect of prior transrectal biopsy on endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;  4 1079-1083
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Beyersdorff D, Taupitz M, Winkelmann B, Fischer T, Lenk S, Loening S A, Hamm B. Patients with a history of elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and negative transrectal US-guided quadrant or sextant biopsy results: value of MR imaging.  Radiology. 2002;  3 701-706
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Yuen J S, Thng C H, Tan P H, Khin L W, Phee S J, Xiao D, Lau W K, Ng W S, Cheng C W. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for the detection of tumor foci in men with prior negative transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy.  J Urol. 2004;  4 1482-1486
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Amsellem-Ouazana D, Younes P, Conquy S, Peyromaure M, Flam T, Debre B, Zerbib M. Negative prostatic biopsies in patients with a high risk of prostate cancer. Is the combination of endorectal MRI and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging (MRSI) a useful tool? A preliminary study.  Eur Urol. 2005;  5 582-586
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mueller-Lisse U G, Swanson M G, Vigneron D B, Hricak H, Bessette A, Males R G, Wood P J, Noworolski S, Nelson S J, Barken I, Carroll P R, Kurhanewicz J. Time-dependent effects of hormone-deprivation therapy on prostate metabolism as detected by combined magnetic resonance imaging and 3D magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging.  Magn Reson Med. 2001;  1 49-57
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Menard C, Smith I C, Somorjai R L, Leboldus L, Patel R, Littman C, Robertson S J, Bezabeh T. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the malignant prostate gland after radiotherapy: a histopathologic study of diagnostic validity.  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;  2 317-323
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 DiBiase S J, Hosseinzadeh K, Gullapalli R P, Jacobs S C, Naslund M J, Sklar G N, Alexander R B, Yu C. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging-guided brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer.  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;  2 429-438
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Coakley F V, Teh H S, Qayyum A, Swanson M G, Lu Y, Roach 3rd  M, Pickett B, Shinohara K, Vigneron D B, Kurhanewicz J. Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging for locally recurrent prostate cancer after external beam radiation therapy: preliminary experience.  Radiology. 2004;  2 441-448
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Huisman H J, Futterer J J, van Lin E N, Welmers A, Scheenen T W, van Dalen J A, Visser A G, Witjes J A, Barentsz J O. Prostate cancer: precision of integrating functional MR imaging with radiation therapy treatment by using fiducial gold markers.  Radiology. 2005;  1 311-317
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D B, Hricak H, Parivar F, Nelson S J, Shinohara K, Carroll P R. Prostate cancer: metabolic response to cryosurgery as detected with 3D H-1 MR spectroscopic imaging.  Radiology. 1996;  2 489-496
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Parivar F, Hricak H, Shinohara K, Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D B, Nelson S J, Carroll P R. Detection of locally recurrent prostate cancer after cryosurgery: evaluation by transrectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.  Urology. 1996;  4 594-599
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hinkle G H, Burgers J K, Neal C E, Texter J H, Kahn D, Williams R D, Maguire R, Rogers B, Olsen J O, Badalament R A. Multicenter radioimmunoscintigraphic evaluation of patients with prostate carcinoma using indium-111 capromab pendetide.  Cancer. 1998;  4 739-747
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sodee D B, Malguria N, Faulhaber P, Resnick M I, Albert J, Bakale G. Multicenter ProstaScint imaging findings in 2 154 patients with prostate cancer. The ProstaScint Imaging Centers.  Urology. 2000;  6 988-993
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Reske S N, Kotzerke J. FDG-PET for clinical use. Results of the 3rd German Interdisciplinary Consensus Conference, “Onko-PET III”, 21 July and 19 September 2000.  Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;  28 1707-1723
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Agus D B, Golde D W, Sgouros G, Ballangrud A, Cordon-Cardo C, Scher H I. Positron emission tomography of a human prostate cancer xenograft: association of changes in deoxyglucose accumulation with other measures of outcome following androgen withdrawal.  Cancer Res. 1998;  14 3009-3014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Seltzer M A, Barbaric Z, Belldegrun A, Naitoh J, Dorey F, Phelps M E, Gambhir S S, Hoh C K. Comparison of helical computerized tomography, positron emission tomography and monoclonal antibody scans for evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with prostate specific antigen relapse after treatment for localized prostate cancer.  J Urol. 1999;  4 1322-1328
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Oyama N, Akino H, Kanamaru H, Suzuki Y, Muramoto S, Yonekura Y, Sadato N, Yamamoto K, Okada K. 11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer.  J Nucl Med. 2002;  2 181-186
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Effert P J, Bares R, Handt S, Wolff J M, Bull U, Jakse G. Metabolic imaging of untreated prostate cancer by positron emission tomography with 18fluorine-labeled deoxyglucose.  J Urol. 1996;  3 994-998
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. PET imaging of prostate cancer using carbon-11-choline.  J Nucl Med. 1998;  6 990-995
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Inaba T. Quantitative measurements of prostatic blood flow and blood volume by positron emission tomography.  J Urol. 1992;  5 1457-1460
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Oyama N, Akino H, Suzuki Y, Kanamaru H, Sadato N, Yonekura Y, Okada K. The increased accumulation of [18-F]fluorodeoxyglucose in untreated prostate cancer.  Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1999;  12 623-629
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Heicappell R, Muller-Mattheis V, Reinhardt M, Vosberg H, Gerharz C D, Muller-Gartner H, Ackermann R. Staging of pelvic lymph nodes in neoplasms of the bladder and prostate by positron emission tomography with 2-[18-F]-2-deoxy-D-glucose.  Eur Urol. 1999;  6 582-587
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Ackerstaff E, Pflug B R, Nelson J B, Bhujwalla Z M. Detection of increased choline compounds with proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy subsequent to malignant transformation of human prostatic epithelial cells.  Cancer Res. 2001;  9 3599-3603
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Hara T, Kosaka N, Shinoura N, Kondo T. PET imaging of brain tumor with [methyl-11C]choline.  J Nucl Med. 1997;  6 842-847
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Breeuwsma A J, Pruim J, Jongen M M, Suurmeijer A J, Vaalburg W, Nijman R J, de Jong I J. In vivo uptake of [(11)C]choline does not correlate with cell proliferation in human prostate cancer.  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;  6 668-673
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Coleman R, DeGrado T, Wang S, Baldwin S, Orr M, Reiman R, Price D. 9:30-9:45. Preliminary evaluation of F-18 fluorocholine (FCH) as a PET tumor imaging agent.  Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;  4 147
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 DeGrado T R, Coleman R E, Wang S, Baldwin S W, Orr M D, Robertson C N, Polascik T J, Price D T. Synthesis and evaluation of 18F-labeled choline as an oncologic tracer for positron emission tomography: initial findings in prostate cancer.  Cancer Res. 2001;  1 110-117
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. Development of (18)-F-fluoroethylcholine for cancer imaging with PET: synthesis, biochemistry, and prostate cancer imaging.  J Nucl Med. 2002;  2 187-199
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Shreve P, Chiao P C, Humes H D, Schwaiger M, Gross M D. Carbon-11-acetate PET imaging in renal disease.  J Nucl Med. 1995;  9 1595-1601
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Shreve P D, Gross M D. Imaging of the pancreas and related diseases with PET carbon-11-acetate.  J Nucl Med. 1997;  8 1305-1310
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Yoshimoto M, Waki A, Yonekura Y, Sadato N, Murata T, Omata N, Takahashi N, Welch M J, Fujibayashi Y. Characterization of acetate metabolism in tumor cells in relation to cell proliferation: acetate metabolism in tumor cells.  Nucl Med Biol. 2001;  2 117-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Swinnen J V, Van Veldhoven P P, Timmermans L, De Schrijver E, Brusselmans K, Vanderhoydonc F, Van de Sande T, Heemers H, Heyns W, Verhoeven G. Fatty acid synthase drives the synthesis of phospholipids partitioning into detergent-resistant membrane microdomains.  Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003;  4 898-903
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Liu R S. 31. Clinical application of [C-11] acetate in oncology.  Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;  4 185
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Oyama N, Miller T R, Dehdashti F, Siegel B A, Fischer K C, Michalski J M, Kibel A S, Andriole G L, Picus J, Welch M J. 11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer: detection of recurrent disease at PSA relapse.  J Nucl Med. 2003;  4 549-555
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Kotzerke J, Volkmer B G, Glatting G, van den Hoff J, Gschwend J E, Messer P, Reske S N, Neumaier B. Intraindividual comparison of [11C]acetate and [11C]choline PET for detection of metastases of prostate cancer.  Nuklearmedizin. 2003;  1 25-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Larson S M, Morris M, Gunther I, Beattie B, Humm J L, Akhurst T A, Finn R D, Erdi Y, Pentlow K, Dyke J, Squire O, Bornmann W, McCarthy T, Welch M, Scher H. Tumor localization of 16beta-18-F-fluoro-5alpha-dihydrotestosterone versus 18F-FDG in patients with progressive, metastatic prostate cancer.  J Nucl Med. 2004;  3 366-373
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Toth G, Lengyel Z, Balkay L, Salah M A, Tron L, Toth C. Detection of prostate cancer with 11C-methionine positron emission tomography.  J Urol. 2005;  1 66-69 ,  discussion 69
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Yoshida S, Nakagomi K, Goto S, Futatsubashi M, Torizuka T. C-choline positron emission tomography in prostate cancer: primary staging and recurrent site staging.  Urol Int. 2005;  3 214-220
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 de Jong I J, Pruim J, Elsinga P H, Vaalburg W, Mensink H J. Visualization of prostate cancer with 11C-choline positron emission tomography.  Eur Urol. 2002;  1 18-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 de Jong I J, Pruim J, Elsinga P H, Vaalburg W, Mensink H J. Preoperative staging of pelvic lymph nodes in prostate cancer by 11C-choline PET.  J Nucl Med. 2003;  3 331-335
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Sutinen E, Nurmi M, Roivainen A, Varpula M, Tolvanen T, Lehikoinen P, Minn H. Kinetics of [(11)C]choline uptake in prostate cancer: a PET study.  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;  3 317-324
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Price D T, Coleman R E, Liao R P, Robertson C N, Polascik T J, DeGrado T R. Comparison of [18F]fluorocholine and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for positron emission tomography of androgen dependent and androgen independent prostate cancer.  J Urol. 2002;  1 273-280
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Kwee S A, Coel M N, Lim J, Ko J P. Prostate cancer localization with 18-fluorine fluorocholine positron emission tomography.  J Urol. 2005;  1 252-255
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Farsad M, Schiavina R, Castellucci P, Nanni C, Corti B, Martorana G, Canini R, Grigioni W, Boschi S, Marengo M, Pettinato C, Salizzoni E, Monetti N, Franchi R, Fanti S. Detection and localization of prostate cancer: Correlation of 11C-choline PET/CT with histopathologic step-section analysis.  J Nucl Med. 2005;  10 1642-1649
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Yu K K, Scheidler J, Hricak H, Vigneron D B, Zaloudek C J, Males R G, Nelson S J, Carroll P R, Kurhanewicz J. Prostate cancer: prediction of extracapsular extension with endorectal MR imaging and three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging.  Radiology. 1999;  2 481-488
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 van Dorsten F A, van der Graaf M, Engelbrecht M R, van Leenders G J, Verhofstad A, Rijpkema M, de la Rosette J J, Barentsz J O, Heerschap A. Combined quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and (1)H MR spectroscopic imaging of human prostate cancer.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;  2 279-287
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Yamaguchi T, Lee J, Uemura H, Sasaki T, Takahashi N, Oka T, Shizukuishi K, Endou H, Kubota Y, Inoue T. Prostate cancer: a comparative study of (11)C-choline PET and MR imaging combined with proton MR spectroscopy.  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;  7 742-748
    PubMedGoogle Scholar

Dr. med. B. Scher

Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin · Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Marchioninistr. 15

81377 München

Phone: +49/89/70 95 46 46

Fax: +49/89/70 95 76 46

Email: Bernhard.Scher@med.uni-muenchen.de

      >