Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography Scans Before Curative Treatment: Ready for Prime Time?

Predictors of Metastasis in 68GA-Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen Pet-CT in the Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer

Background: The objective of this study was to investigate factors influencing Gallium 68 Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography (Ga68 PSMA PET-CT) uptake for primary staging in prostate cancer. Methods: Retrospective analysis was conducted on 499 non-metastatic and 243 de novo metastatic prostate cancer cases undergoing Ga68 PSMA PET-CT. Demographic, clinical, and imaging data were collected and analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression determined independent risk factors for metastasis detection on Ga68 PSMA PET-CT. Results: Metastatic cases showed higher levels of total PSA, PSA density (dPSA) and biopsy ISUP grade group compared to non-metastatic cases. Multivariate analysis identified cT2 stage and dPSA as independent predictors of metastasis detection on Ga68 PSMA PET-CT. Conclusions: Ga68 PSMA PET-CT plays a crucial role in prostate cancer staging, with identified factors such as clinical T stage and dPSA significantly impacting its diagnostic accuracy. These findings underscore the importance of Ga68 PSMA PET-CT in refining clinical staging and guiding treatment decisions for prostate cancer patients.

A Comparison of Globally Applied Prognostic Risk Groups and the Prevalence of Metastatic Disease on Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Various risk classification systems (RCSs) are used globally to stratify newly diagnosed patients with prostate cancer (PCa) into prognostic groups.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the predictive value of different prognostic subgroups (low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease) within the RCSs for detecting metastatic disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for primary staging, and to assess whether further subdivision of subgroups would be beneficial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients with newly diagnosed PCa, in whom PSMA-PET/CT was performed between 2017 and 2022, were studied retrospectively. Patients were stratified into risk groups based on four RCSs: European Association of Urology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), Cambridge Prognostic Group (CPG), and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The prevalence of metastatic disease on PSMA-PET/CT was compared among the subgroups within the four RCSs.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

In total, 2630 men with newly diagnosed PCa were studied. Any metastatic disease was observed in 35% (931/2630) of patients. Among patients classified as having intermediate- and high-risk disease, the prevalence of metastases ranged from approximately 12% to 46%. Two RCSs further subdivided these groups. According to the NCCN, metastatic disease was observed in 5.8%, 13%, 22%, and 62% for favorable intermediate-, unfavorable intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk PCa, respectively. Regarding the CPG, these values were 6.9%, 13%, 21%, and 60% for the corresponding risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underlines the importance of nuanced risk stratification, recommending the further subdivision of intermediate- and high-risk disease given the notable variation in the prevalence of metastatic disease. PSMA-PET/CT for primary staging should be reserved for patients with unfavorable intermediate- or higher-risk disease.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The use of various risk classification systems in patients with prostate cancer helps identify those at a higher risk of having metastatic disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for primary staging.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

BACKGROUND

Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.