Purpose: The conventional imaging flowchart for prostate cancer (PCa) staging may fail in correctly detecting lymph node metastases (LNM). Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) represents the only reliable method, although invasive. A new amino acid PET compound, [18F]-fluciclovine, was recently authorized in suspected PCa recurrence but not yet included in the standard staging work-up of primary PCa. A prospective monocentric study was designed to evaluate [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT diagnostic performance for preoperative LN staging in primary high-risk PCa. Methods: Consecutive patients (pts) with biopsy-proven PCa, standard staging (including [11C]choline PET/CT), eligible for PLND, were enrolled to undergo an investigational [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT. Nodal uptake higher than surrounding background was reported by at least two readers (blinded to [11C]choline) using a visual 5-point scale (1–2 probably negative; 4–5 probably positive; 3 equivocal); SUVmax, target-to-background (aorta—A; bone marrow—BM) ratios (TBRs), were also calculated. PET results were validated with PLND. [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT performance using visual score and semi-quantitative indexes was analyzed both per patient and per LN anatomical region, compared to conventional [11C]choline and clinical predictive factors (to note that diagnostic performance of [18F]-fluciclovine was explored for LNM but not examined for intrapelvic or extrapelvic M1 lesions). Results: Overall, 94 pts underwent [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT; 72/94 (77%) high-risk pts were included in the final analyses (22 pts excluded: 8 limited PLND; 3 intermediate-risk; 2 treated with radiotherapy; 4 found to be M1; 5 neoadjuvant hormonal therapy). Median LNM risk by Briganti nomogram was 19%. LNM confirmed on histology was 25% (18/72 pts). Overall, 1671 LN were retrieved; 45/1671 (3%) LNM detected. Per pt, median no. of removed LN was 22 (mean 23 ± 10; range 8–51), of LNM was 2 (mean 3 ± 2; range 1–10). Median LNM size was 5 mm (mean 5 ± 2.5; range 2–10). On patient-based analyses (n = 72), diagnostic performance for LNM resulted significant with [18F]-fluciclovine (AUC 0.66, p 0.04; 50% sensitivity, 81% specificity, 47% PPV, 83% NPV, 74% accuracy), but not with [11C]choline (AUC 0.60, p 0.2; 50%, 70%, 36%, 81%, and 65% respectively). Briganti nomogram (OR = 1.03, p = 0.04) and [18F]-fluciclovine visual score (≥ 4) (OR = 4.27, p = 0.02) resulted independent predictors of LNM at multivariable analyses. On region-based semi-quantitative analyses (n = 576), PET/CT performed better using TBR parameters (TBR-A similar to TBR-BM; TBR-A fluciclovine AUC 0.61, p 0.35, vs choline AUC 0.57 p 0.54; TBR-BM fluciclovine AUC 0.61, p 0.36, vs choline AUC 0.58, p 0.52) rather than using absolute LN SUVmax (fluciclovine AUC 0.51, p 0.91, vs choline AUC 0.51, p 0.94). However, in all cases, diagnostic performance was not statistically significant for LNM detection, although slightly in favor of the experimental tracer [18F]-fluciclovine for each parameter. On the contrary, visual interpretation significantly outperformed PET semi-quantitative parameters (choline and fluciclovine: AUC 0.65 and 0.64 respectively; p 0.03) and represents an independent predictive factor of LNM with both tracers, in particular [18F]-fluciclovine (OR = 8.70, p 0.002, vs OR = 3.98, p = 0.03). Conclusion: In high-risk primary PCa, [18F]-fluciclovine demonstrates some advantages compared with [11C]choline but sensitivity for metastatic LN detection is still inadequate compared to PLND. Visual (combined morphological and functional), compared to semi-quantitative assessment, is promising but relies mainly on readers’ experience rather than on unquestionable LN avidity. Trial registration: EudraCT number: 2014–003,165-15

[18F]-Fluciclovine PET/CT for preoperative nodal staging in high-risk primary prostate cancer: final results of a prospective trial

Zanoni L.;Bianchi L.;Nanni C.;Pultrone C.;Giunchi F.;Bossert I.;Schiavina R.;Fiorentino M.;Fonti C.;D'Errico A.;Brunocilla E.;Fanti S.
2021

Abstract

Purpose: The conventional imaging flowchart for prostate cancer (PCa) staging may fail in correctly detecting lymph node metastases (LNM). Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) represents the only reliable method, although invasive. A new amino acid PET compound, [18F]-fluciclovine, was recently authorized in suspected PCa recurrence but not yet included in the standard staging work-up of primary PCa. A prospective monocentric study was designed to evaluate [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT diagnostic performance for preoperative LN staging in primary high-risk PCa. Methods: Consecutive patients (pts) with biopsy-proven PCa, standard staging (including [11C]choline PET/CT), eligible for PLND, were enrolled to undergo an investigational [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT. Nodal uptake higher than surrounding background was reported by at least two readers (blinded to [11C]choline) using a visual 5-point scale (1–2 probably negative; 4–5 probably positive; 3 equivocal); SUVmax, target-to-background (aorta—A; bone marrow—BM) ratios (TBRs), were also calculated. PET results were validated with PLND. [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT performance using visual score and semi-quantitative indexes was analyzed both per patient and per LN anatomical region, compared to conventional [11C]choline and clinical predictive factors (to note that diagnostic performance of [18F]-fluciclovine was explored for LNM but not examined for intrapelvic or extrapelvic M1 lesions). Results: Overall, 94 pts underwent [18F]-fluciclovine PET/CT; 72/94 (77%) high-risk pts were included in the final analyses (22 pts excluded: 8 limited PLND; 3 intermediate-risk; 2 treated with radiotherapy; 4 found to be M1; 5 neoadjuvant hormonal therapy). Median LNM risk by Briganti nomogram was 19%. LNM confirmed on histology was 25% (18/72 pts). Overall, 1671 LN were retrieved; 45/1671 (3%) LNM detected. Per pt, median no. of removed LN was 22 (mean 23 ± 10; range 8–51), of LNM was 2 (mean 3 ± 2; range 1–10). Median LNM size was 5 mm (mean 5 ± 2.5; range 2–10). On patient-based analyses (n = 72), diagnostic performance for LNM resulted significant with [18F]-fluciclovine (AUC 0.66, p 0.04; 50% sensitivity, 81% specificity, 47% PPV, 83% NPV, 74% accuracy), but not with [11C]choline (AUC 0.60, p 0.2; 50%, 70%, 36%, 81%, and 65% respectively). Briganti nomogram (OR = 1.03, p = 0.04) and [18F]-fluciclovine visual score (≥ 4) (OR = 4.27, p = 0.02) resulted independent predictors of LNM at multivariable analyses. On region-based semi-quantitative analyses (n = 576), PET/CT performed better using TBR parameters (TBR-A similar to TBR-BM; TBR-A fluciclovine AUC 0.61, p 0.35, vs choline AUC 0.57 p 0.54; TBR-BM fluciclovine AUC 0.61, p 0.36, vs choline AUC 0.58, p 0.52) rather than using absolute LN SUVmax (fluciclovine AUC 0.51, p 0.91, vs choline AUC 0.51, p 0.94). However, in all cases, diagnostic performance was not statistically significant for LNM detection, although slightly in favor of the experimental tracer [18F]-fluciclovine for each parameter. On the contrary, visual interpretation significantly outperformed PET semi-quantitative parameters (choline and fluciclovine: AUC 0.65 and 0.64 respectively; p 0.03) and represents an independent predictive factor of LNM with both tracers, in particular [18F]-fluciclovine (OR = 8.70, p 0.002, vs OR = 3.98, p = 0.03). Conclusion: In high-risk primary PCa, [18F]-fluciclovine demonstrates some advantages compared with [11C]choline but sensitivity for metastatic LN detection is still inadequate compared to PLND. Visual (combined morphological and functional), compared to semi-quantitative assessment, is promising but relies mainly on readers’ experience rather than on unquestionable LN avidity. Trial registration: EudraCT number: 2014–003,165-15
Zanoni L.; Bianchi L.; Nanni C.; Pultrone C.; Giunchi F.; Bossert I.; Matti A.; Schiavina R.; Fiorentino M.; Romagnoli D.; Fonti C.; Lodi F.; D'Errico A.; Brunocilla E.; Porreca A.; Fanti S.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/847904
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact