Comparison of Digital versus Analog 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT Performance in Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Patients with Early Biochemical Recurrence or Persistence after Radical Treatment

• Published in: Diagnostics (Basel) 2023-11, Vol.13 (23), p.3535
• Main Authors: Rovera, Guido, Grimaldi, Serena, Dall’Armellina, Sara, Zotta, Michela, Finessi, Monica, Passera, Roberto, Deandreis, Désirée
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 68Ga-PSMA-11; Algorithms; Androgens; Antigens; biochemical recurrence; Cancer therapies; digital PET/CT; Drug dosages; Localization; Medical imaging; Metastasis; Nuclear medicine; Patients; PET/CT; Prostate cancer; Radiation therapy; Scanners; Tomography
• ISSN: 2075-4418; 2075-4418
• DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13233535

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the favorable characteristics of novel digital PET/CT (dPET) scanners compared to analog systems (aPET) could translate into an improved disease localization in prostate cancer (PCa) patients with early biochemical recurrence/persistence (BCR/BCP). A retrospective analysis was conducted on 440 consecutive analog (n = 311) or digital (n = 129) 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scans performed in hormone-sensitive ADT-free PCa patients with early-BCR/BCP (PSA at PET ≤ 2.0 ng/mL), previously treated with radical intent (radical-prostatectomy/radiotherapy). dPET showed a higher positivity rate compared to aPET (48.8% [63/129] vs. 37.3% [116/311], p = 0.03), despite the slightly lower median PSA value of the dPET cohort (0.33 [IQR: 0.26–0.61] vs. 0.55 [IQR: 0.40–0.85] ng/mL, p < 0.01). dPET detection rate was higher in both PSA ranges 0.2–0.5 ng/mL (39.0% [32/82] vs. 25.2% [34/135], p = 0.03) and 0.5–1.0 ng/mL (63.2% [24/38] vs. 40.8% [53/130], p = 0.02), but not for PSA ≥ 1.0 ng/mL. dPET detected a higher per patient median number of pathologic findings (PSMA-RADS ≥ 3) and multi-metastatic cases (>3 lesions) among N1/M1-positive scans (21.7% [10/46] vs. 8.6% [9/105], p = 0.03). Moreover, the proportion of uncertain findings among pathological lesions was significantly lower for dPET than aPET (24.4% [39/160] vs. 38.5% [60/156], p = 0.008). Overall, 68Ga-PSMA-11 dPET showed a better performance compared to aPET, resulting in a higher scan-positivity rate, a higher number of detected pathological lesions, and a lower rate of uncertain findings.