[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Keywords
For Authors::
Aims and Scope
Call for Papers
Submission Instructions
For Reviewers::
Referee page
Subscription::
Subscription Form
News & Events::
Journal News
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE
Volume 23, Issue 3 (7-2025)                   Int J Radiat Res 2025, 23(3): 665-675 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Zhou S, Ren H, Zhu K, Cheng S. Performance of PSMA PET-CT imaging in predicting outcomes and assessing response in prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Radiat Res 2025; 23 (3) :665-675
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-6616-en.html
Performance of PSMA PET-CT imaging in predicting outcomes and assessing response in prostate cancer: a meta-analysis
S. Zhou , H. Ren , K. Zhu , S. Cheng
Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China 310052 , slcheng@njmu.edu.cn
Abstract:   (328 Views)
Background: One of the most widespread forms of cancer in males across the globe is prostate cancer (PC), which is seeing an upward trend in illness and death. The use of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PSMA PET-CT) is gaining traction as a valuable imaging strategy that shows potential for diagnosing and monitoring PC. Nevertheless, existing studies on how PSMA PET-CT parameters influence patient outcomes show varying results, highlighting the need for definitive evidence to validate their predictive capabilities. Materials and Methods: The objective of this thorough examination and structured evaluation was to assess the predictive capacity of parameters derived from PSMA PET-CT in PC patients. The databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were accessed to find research on the link between metrics generated from PSMA PET-CT and survival rates in PC patients. The meta-analysis utilized Stata version 14.0. To determine whether publication bias existed among the studies, Egger’s test was employed. Results: Seventeen research investigations that included 1,103 individuals were combined. The findings from the meta-analysis indicated that TV-PSMA emerged as a crucial factor in forecasting overall survival (OS) for PC patients (HR=1.69, 95% CI 1.24-2.29), while parameters related to SUV showed no meaningful association with OS or progression-free survival (PFS). Conclusion: The PSMA PET-CT-derived TV-PSMA parameters serve as reliable predictors of OS in PC patients, while SUV-related parameters and TL-PSMA each show no significant performance in prognostic predictions. Future research should seek to validate these findings in a broader population, and these parameters should be effectively incorporated into clinical decision-making to enhance patient outcomes.
Keywords: Prostate cancer, prostate-specific membrane antigen, PET-CT, prognosis, meta-analysis.
Full-Text [PDF 1040 kb]   (111 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
References
1. 1. James ND, Tannock I, N'Dow J, et al. (2024) The Lancet Commission on prostate cancer: planning for the surge in cases. Lancet, 403: 1683-1722. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00651-2]
2. Gandaglia G, Leni R, Bray F, et al. (2021) Epidemiology and prevention of prostate cancer. European Urology Oncology , 4: 877-892. [DOI:10.1016/j.euo.2021.09.006]
3. Siegel DA, O'Neil ME, Richards TB, et al. (2020) Prostate Cancer incidence and survival, by stage and race/ethnicity - United States, 2001-2017. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69: 1473-1480. [DOI:10.15585/mmwr.mm6941a1]
4. Hope TA, Afshar-Oromieh A, Eiber M, et al. (2018) Imaging Prostate Cancer With Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen PET/CT and PET/MRI: Current and future applications. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 211: 286-294. [DOI:10.2214/AJR.18.19957]
5. Yu W, Zhao M, Deng Y, et al. (2023) Meta-analysis of (18) F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, (18) F-FDG PET/CT, and (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in diagnostic efficacy of prostate Cancer. Cancer Imaging, 23: 77. [DOI:10.1186/s40644-023-00599-y]
6. Chow KM, So WZ, Lee HJ, et al. (2023) Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and conventional imaging modalities for initial staging of intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 84: 36-48. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2023.03.001]
7. Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, et al. (2023) PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 50: 1466-1486. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-022-06089-w]
8. Otani, Tomoaki et al. (2024) PSMA PET/CT imaging and its application to prostate cancer treatment. Japanese journal of radiology vol. 43(1): 1-12. [DOI:10.1007/s11604-024-01646-9]
9. Li R, Ravizzini GC, Gorin MA, et al. (2018) The use of PET/CT in prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 21: 4-21. [DOI:10.1038/s41391-017-0007-8]
10. Hadisi M, Vosoughi N, Yousefnia H et al. (2022) Compartmental modeling and absorbed dose assessment of 188Re-HYNIC-PSMA according to the rats? biodistribution data. International Journal of Radiation Research, 20: 823-827.
11. Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, et al. (1997) Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clinical Cancer Research, 3: 81-85.
12. Mannweiler S, Amersdorfer P, Trajanoski S, et al. (2009) Heterogeneity of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression in prostate carcinoma with distant metastasis. Pathology Oncology Research, 15: 167-172. [DOI:10.1007/s12253-008-9104-2]
13. Bostwick DG, Pacelli A, Blute M, et al. (1998) Prostate specific membrane antigen expression in prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and adenocarcinoma: a study of 184 cases. Cancer, 82: 2256-2261. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980601)82:11<2256::AID-CNCR22>3.0.CO;2-S [DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19980601)82:113.0.CO;2-S]
14. John N, Pathmanandavel S, Crumbaker M, et al. (2023) 177Lu-PSMA SPECT quantitation at 6 weeks (Dose 2) predicts short progression-free survival for patients undergoing 177Lu-PSMA-I&T therapy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 64: 410-415. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.122.264677]
15. Seifert R, Seitzer K, Herrmann K, et al. (2020) Analysis of PSMA expression and outcome in patients with advanced prostate cancer receiving 177Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy. Theranostics, 10: 7812-7820. [DOI:10.7150/thno.47251]
16. Pathmanandavel S, Crumbaker M, Nguyen A et al. (2023) The prognostic value of posttreatment 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with 177Lu-PSMA-617 and NOX66 in a phase I/II trial (LuPIN). Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 64: 69-74. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.122.264104]
17. Acar E, Özdoğan Ö, Aksu A, et al. (2019) The use of molecular volumetric parameters for the evaluation of Lu-177 PSMA I&T therapy response and survival. Annals of Nuclear Medicine, 33: 681-688. [DOI:10.1007/s12149-019-01376-3]
18. Mollica V, Marchetti A, Fraccascia N, et al. (2024) A prospective study on the early evaluation of response to androgen receptor-targeted agents with (11)C-Choline, (68)Ga-PSMA, and (18)F-FACBC PET in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a single-center experience. ESMO Open, 9: 103448. [DOI:10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103448]
19. Widjaja L, Werner RA, Ross TL, et al. (2021) Psma expression predicts early biochemical response in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer under177lu-psma-617 radioligand therapy. Cancers, 13: 2938. [DOI:10.3390/cancers13122938]
20. Has Simsek D, Kuyumcu S, Karadogan S et al. (2021) Can PSMA-based tumor burden predict response to docetaxel treatment in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer? Ann Nucl Med , 35: 680-690. [DOI:10.1007/s12149-021-01610-x]
21. Güven O, Karyaǧar S, Arici S, et al. (2023) How reliable is the high-volume definition in prostate cancer patients: the potential game-changing role of PSMA. Nuclear Medicine Communications, 44: 816-824. [DOI:10.1097/MNM.0000000000001722]
22. Zou Q, Jiao J, Zou MH, et al. (2020) Semi-automatic evaluation of baseline whole-body tumor burden as an imaging biomarker of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Abdominal Radiology, 45: 4202-4213. [DOI:10.1007/s00261-020-02745-7]
23. Murad V, Glicksman RM, Berlin A, et al. (2023) Association of PSMA PET-derived parameters and outcomes of patients treated for oligorecurrent prostate cancer. Radiology , 309(3): e231407. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.231407]
24. Li Y, Wang S, Zhao S, et al. (2024) Initial [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT in treatment-naïve prostate cancer: correlation with post-ADT PSA outcomes and recurrence. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 51: 2458-2466. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-024-06684-z]
25. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ , 372: n71. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.n71]
26. Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L (1998) Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Statistics in Medicine, 17: 2815-2834. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981230)17:24<2815::AID-SIM110>3.0.CO;2-8 [DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981230)17:243.0.CO;2-8]
27. Hartrampf, Philipp E, et al. (2023) SUVmean on baseline [18F]PSMA-1007 PET and clinical parameters are associated with survival in prostate cancer patients scheduled for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 50: 3465-3474. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-023-06281-6]
28. Ferdinandus J, Violet J, Sandhu S, et al. (2020) Prognostic biomarkers in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving [177Lu]-PSMA-617. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 47: 2322-2327. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-020-04723-z]
29. Seifert R, Herrmann K, Kleesiek J, et al. (2020) Semiautomatically quantified tumor volume using 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET as a biomarker for survival in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 61: 1786-1792. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.120.242057]
30. Seifert R, Kessel K, Schlack K, et al. (2021) PSMA PET total tumor volume predicts outcome of patients with advanced prostate cancer receiving [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy in a bicentric analysis. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 48: 1200-1210. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-020-05040-1]
31. Hartrampf PE, Hüttmann T, Seitz AK, et al. (2023) SUVmean on baseline [18F]PSMA-1007 PET and clinical parameters are associated with survival in prostate cancer patients scheduled for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 50: 3465-3474. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-023-06281-6]
32. Widjaja L, Werner RA, Krischke E, et al. (2023) Individual radiosensitivity reflected by γ-H2AX and 53BP1 foci predicts outcome in PSMA-targeted radioligand therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 50: 602-612. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-022-05974-8]
33. Lisney AR, Leitsmann C, Strauß A, et al. (2022) The role of PSMA PET/CT in the primary diagnosis and follow-up of prostate cancer-a practical clinical review. Cancers, 14: 3638. [DOI:10.3390/cancers14153638]
34. Combes AD, Palma CA, Calopedos R, et al. (2022) PSMA PET-CT in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. Diagnostics, 12: 2594. [DOI:10.3390/diagnostics12112594]
35. Humphrey PA (2017) Histopathology of prostate cancer. Perspectives in Medicine, 7: a030411. [DOI:10.1101/cshperspect.a030411]
36. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. (2013) Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. European Urology, 64: 876-892. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.049]
37. Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, et al. (2016) Simultaneous (68)Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. European Urology, 70: 829-836. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053]
38. Kim YI, Lee HS, Choi JY (2021) Prognostic significance of pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT volumetric parameters in patients with colorectal liver metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Nuclear Medicine, 46: 206-213. [DOI:10.1097/RLU.0000000000003479]
39. Pierce LA, 2nd, Elston BF, Clunie DA, et al. (2015) A digital reference object to analyze calculation accuracy of PET standardized uptake value. Radiology, 277: 538-545. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.2015141262]
40. Tahari AK, Chien D, Azadi JR, et al. (2014) Optimum lean body formulation for correction of standardized uptake value in PET imaging. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 55: 1481-1484. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.113.136986]
41. Parlak Y, Mutevelizade G, Sezgin C, et al. (2023) The effect of patients' body mass indices on PET/CT images with 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen on a TruFlight PET/CT system. International Journal of Radiation Research, 21: 31-36.
42. Meier JG, Einstein SA, Diab RH, et al. (2019) Impact of free-breathing CT on quantitative measurements of static and quiescent period-gated PET Images. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 64: 105013. [DOI:10.1088/1361-6560/ab1cdd]
43. Rahman WT, Wale DJ, Viglianti BL, et al. (2019) The impact of infection and inflammation in oncologic (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 117: 109168. [DOI:10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109168]
44. Geworski L, Knoop BO, de Wit M, et al. (2002) Multicenter comparison of calibration and cross calibration of PET scanners. J Nucl Med, 43: 635-639.
45. Schmuck S, von Klot CA, Henkenberens C, et al. (2017) Initial experience with volumetric (68)Ga-PSMA I&T PET/CT for assessment of whole-body tumor burden as a quantitative imaging biomarker in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med, 58: 1962-1968. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.117.193581]
46. Schmidkonz C, Cordes M, Goetz TI, et al. (2019) 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT derived quantitative volumetric tumor parameters for classification and evaluation of therapeutic response of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients. Ann Nucl Med, 33: 766-775. [DOI:10.1007/s12149-019-01387-0]
47. Sweat SD, Pacelli A, Murphy GP, et al. (1998) Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression is greatest in prostate adenocarcinoma and lymph node metastases. Urology, 52: 637-640. [DOI:10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00278-7]
48. Rowe SP, Pienta KJ, Pomper MG, et al. (2018) Proposal for a structured reporting system for prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted PET imaging: PSMA-RADS version 1.0. J Nucl Med, 59: 479-485. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.117.195255]
49. Schwarzenböck SM, Eiber M, Kundt G, et al. (2016) Prospective evaluation of [(11)C]Choline PET/CT in therapy response assessment of standardized docetaxel first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced castration refractory prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mole Imaging, 43: 2105-2113. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-016-3439-9]
50. Cohade C and Wahl RL (2003) Applications of positron emission tomography/computed tomography image fusion in clinical positron emission tomography-clinical use, interpretation methods, diagnostic improvements. Sem Nucl Med, 33: 228-237. [DOI:10.1053/snuc.2003.127312]
51. Demir F and Yanarates A (2020) Prognostic value of various metabolic parameters on pre-treatment 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer. International Journal of Radiation Research, 18: 799-807. [DOI:10.52547/ijrr.18.4.799]
52. Schöder H, Herrmann K, Gönen M, et al. (2005) 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the detection of disease in patients with prostate-specific antigen relapse after radical prostatectomy. Clinical Cancer Research, 11: 4761-4769. [DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0249]
53. Jadvar H (2013) Imaging evaluation of prostate cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT: utility and limitations. Eur J Nucl Med Mole Imaging, 40 (Suppl 1): S5-10. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-013-2361-7]
54. Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Schlemmer HP, et al. (2014) 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, 41: 887-897. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-013-2660-z]
55. Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, et al. (2015) 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, 56: 1185-1190. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.115.160382]
56. Schwenck J, Rempp H, Reischl G, et al. (2017) Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 44: 92-101. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-016-3490-6]
57. Kunst N, Long JB, Westvold S, et al. (2024) Long-term outcomes of prostate-specific membrane antigen-PET imaging of recurrent prostate cancer. JAMA Netw Open, 7: e2440591. [DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.40591]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.04 seconds with 50 queries by YEKTAWEB 4722