nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

20.09.2023 | Original Article

[⁶⁸Ga]Ga‑LNC1007 PET/CT in the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma: comparison with 2-[¹⁸F]FDG/[⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT

verfasst von: Rong Lin, Chao Wang, Shaohao Chen, Tingting Lin, Hai Cai, Shaoming Chen, Yun Yang, Jiaying Zhang, Fuqi Xu, Jingjing Zhang, Xiaoyuan Chen, Jie Zang, Weibing Miao

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 2/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the potential efficiency of [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 with 2-[¹⁸F]FDG/[⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT for detecting renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and to explore parameters derived from [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 PET/CT for discriminating pathological characteristics in RCC.

Methods

Twenty-five RCC patients confirmed by pathology were enrolled in this prospective study. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max), mean SUV (SUV_mean), gross tumor volume (GTV) and total lesion-tracer (TL-tracer) of lesions were calculated from the corresponding PET/CT images. Pathological characteristics included World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grade and adverse pathological features (tumor necrosis or sarcomatoid or rhabdoid feature).

Results

[⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 PET/CT showed a higher detection rate for primary lesions than 2-[¹⁸F]FDG and [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA (LNC1007 vs. FDG: 13/17 vs. 4/17, P = 0.005; LNC1007 vs. PSMA: 9/11 vs. 6/11, P = 0.361). [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 PET/CT showed higher SUV_max (6.6 vs. 3.7, P = 0.005), SUV_mean (4.1 vs. 2.3, P = 0.001) and TBR (2.6 vs. 1.7, P = 0.011) compared with 2-[¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT, and it also showed higher TBR (2.9 vs. 0.5, P = 0.003), TBR-delay (2.8 vs. 0.3, P = 0.003), GTV (84.1 vs. 42.9, P = 0.003) and TL-tracer (442.7 vs. 235.8, P = 0.008) compared with [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT. SUV_max and TBR derived from [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 PET/CT could effectively differentiate WHO/ISUP grade (3–4 vs. 1–2) and adverse pathological features (positive vs. negative) (SUV_max: AUC 0.81, P = 0.04; AUC 0.80, P = 0.033; TBR: AUC 0.84, P = 0.026; AUC 0.85, P = 0.014). The SUV_max was positively correlated with the FAP expression, integrin α_vβ₃ expression and the total expression of FAP and integrin α_vβ₃ (r = 0.577, P = 0.006, r = 0.701, P < 0.001, and r = 0.702, P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

[⁶⁸Ga]Ga-LNC1007 is a promising tracer for RCC imaging and can effectively identify aggressive pathological characteristics of RCC.

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21442.CrossRefPubMed

Joosten SC, Smits KM, Aarts MJ, Melotte V, Koch A, Tjan-Heijnen VC, et al. Epigenetics in renal cell cancer: mechanisms and clinical applications. Nat Rev Urol. 2018;15:430–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-018-0023-z.CrossRefPubMed

Capitanio U, Bensalah K, Bex A, Boorjian SA, Bray F, Coleman J, et al. Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2019;75:74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.036.CrossRefPubMed

Miyakita H, Tokunaga M, Onda H, Usui Y, Kinoshita H, Kawamura N, et al. Significance of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for detection of renal cell carcinoma and immunohistochemical glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1) expression in the cancer. Int J Urol. 2002;9:15–8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-2042.2002.00416.x.CrossRefPubMed

Liu Y. The place of FDG PET/CT in renal cell carcinoma: value and limitations. Front Oncol. 2016;6:201. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2016.00201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, Bensadoun H, Regeasse A, Comoz F, et al. Efficiency of [¹⁸F]FDG PET in characterising renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: a comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:1236–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-003-1211-4.CrossRefPubMed

Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, Tang C, Vela I, Thomas P, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. The Lancet. 2020;395:1208–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30314-7.CrossRef

Chang SS, Reuter VE, Heston W, Bander NH, Grauer LS, Gaudin PB. Five different anti-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) antibodies confirm PSMA expression in tumor-associated neovasculature. Can Res. 1999;59:3192–8.

Golan S, Aviv T, Groshar D, Yakimov M, Zohar Y, Prokocimer Y, et al. Dynamic ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT for the primary evaluation of localized renal mass: a prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:773–8. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.251272.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Gao J, Xu Q, Fu Y, He K, Zhang C, Zhang Q, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of ⁶⁸Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT parameters for discriminating pathological characteristics in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:561–9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.251272.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Raveenthiran S, Esler R, Yaxley J, Kyle S. The use of ⁶⁸Ga-PET/CT PSMA in the staging of primary and suspected recurrent renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:2280–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04432-2.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Hamson EJ, Keane FM, Tholen S, Schilling O, Gorrell MD. Understanding fibroblast activation protein (FAP): substrates, activities, expression and targeting for cancer therapy. Proteomics-Clin Appl. 2014;8:454–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.201300095.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Li M, Younis MH, Zhang Y, Cai W, Lan X. Clinical summary of fibroblast activation protein inhibitor-based radiopharmaceuticals: cancer and beyond. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:2844–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05706-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Pang Y, Zhao L, Luo Z, Hao B, Wu H, Lin Q, et al. Comparison of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI and ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in gastric, duodenal, and colorectal cancers. Radiology. 2021;298:393–402. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020203275.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Chen X, Hou Y, Tohme M, Park R, Khankaldyyan V, Gonzales-Gomez I, et al. Pegylated Arg-Gly-Asp peptide: ⁶⁴Cu labeling and PET imaging of brain tumor αvβ3-integrin expression. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1776–83.PubMed

16.

Chen X, Park R, Tohme M, Shahinian AH, Bading JR, Conti PS. MicroPET and autoradiographic imaging of breast cancer αv-integrin expression using ¹⁸F-and ⁶⁴Cu-labeled RGD peptide. Bioconjug Chem. 2004;15:41–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/bc0300403.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Zang J, Wen X, Lin R, Zeng X, Wang C, Shi M, et al. Synthesis, preclinical evaluation and radiation dosimetry of a dual targeting PET tracer [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-FAPI-RGD. Theranostics. 2022;12:7180. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.79144.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Delahunt B, Eble JN, Egevad L, Samaratunga H. Grading of renal cell carcinoma. Histopathology. 2019;74:4–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13735.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Moch H, Amin MB, Berney DM, Compérat EM, Gill AJ, Hartmann A, et al. The 2022 World Health Organization classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs—part A: renal, penile, and testicular tumours. Eur Urol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.06.016.

20.

Dagher J, Delahunt B, Rioux-Leclercq N, Egevad L, Srigley JR, Coughlin G, et al. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: validation of World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology grading. Histopathology. 2017;71:918–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13311.CrossRef

21.

Delahunt B, McKenney JK, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, et al. A novel grading system for clear cell renal cell carcinoma incorporating tumor necrosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37:311–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e318270f71c.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Khor L-Y, Dhakal HP, Jia X, Reynolds JP, McKenney JK, Rini BI, et al. Tumor necrosis adds prognostically significant information to grade in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:1224–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000690.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Katz MD, Serrano MF, Grubb RL III, Skolarus TA, Gao F, Humphrey PA, et al. Percent microscopic tumor necrosis and survival after curative surgery for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2010;183:909–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.010.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Sengupta S, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Frank I, Thompson RH, Webster WS, et al. Histologic coagulative tumor necrosis as a prognostic indicator of renal cell carcinoma aggressiveness. Cancer. 2005;104:511–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21206.CrossRefPubMed

25.

de Peralta-Venturina M, Moch H, Amin M, Tamboli P, Hailemariam S, Mihatsch M, et al. Sarcomatoid differentiation in renal cell carcinoma: a study of 101 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:275–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-200103000-00001.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Pichler R, Compérat E, Klatte T, Pichler M, Loidl W, Lusuardi L, et al. Renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features: finally new therapeutic hope? Cancers. 2019;11:422. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers11030422.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Zhang BY, Cheville JC, Thompson RH, Lohse CM, Boorjian SA, Leibovich BC, et al. Impact of rhabdoid differentiation on prognosis for patients with grade 4 renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2015;68:5–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.002.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Przybycin CG, McKenney JK, Reynolds JP, Campbell S, Zhou M, Karafa MT, et al. Rhabdoid differentiation is associated with aggressive behavior in renal cell carcinoma: a clinicopathologic analysis of 76 cases with clinical follow-up. T Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:1260–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000251.CrossRef

29.

Verhoeff SR, van Es SC, Boon E, van Helden E, Angus L, Elias SG, et al. Lesion detection by [⁸⁹Zr] Zr-DFO-girentuximab and [¹⁸F] FDG-PET/CT in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:1931–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04358-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Fendler WP, Eiber M, Beheshti M, Bomanji J, Calais J, Ceci F, et al. PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50:1466–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-06089-w.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Zhao L, Wen X, Xu W, Pang Y, Sun L, Wu X, et al. Clinical Evaluation of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-RGD for Imaging of Fibroblast Activation Protein and Integrin α_vβ₃ in Various Cancer Types. J Nucl Med. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.122.265383.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Lan L, Zhang S, Xu T, Liu H, Wang W, Feng Y, et al. Prospective comparison of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI versus ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for tumor staging in biliary tract cancers. Radiology. 2022;304:648–57. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.213118.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Lin R, Lin Z, Chen Z, Zheng S, Zhang J, Zang J, et al. [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT in the evaluation of gastric cancer: comparison with [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:2960–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05799-5.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Xie F, Fu L, Zhou W. Superiority of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-04 in Delineation of Soft Tissue and Liver Metastases in Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma for Restaging. Clin Nucl Med. 2022;47:e758–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004374.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Dong A, Yang B, Bai Y, Zuo C. ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT in a Small Sarcomatoid Renal Cell Carcinoma With Widespread Metastases. Clin Nucl Med. 2023;48:457–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004607.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Civan C, Isik EG, Karadogan S, Sanli Y, Kuyumcu S. ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in Metastatic Papillary Renal Cell Cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2022:10.1097. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004587.

37.

Dong A, Yang Q, Hua M, Cheng C, Zuo C. Lipid-poor renal angiomyolipoma mimicking renal cell carcinoma on ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2022;47:991–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004297.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Toriihara A, Duan H, Thompson HM, Park S, Hatami N, Baratto L, et al. ¹⁸F-FPPRGD₂ PET/CT in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:1518–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04295-7.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Withofs N, Signolle N, Somja J, Lovinfosse P, Nzaramba EM, Mievis F, et al. ¹⁸F-FPRGD₂ PET/CT imaging of integrin α_vβ₃ in renal carcinomas: correlation with histopathology. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:361–4. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.149021.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Wang G, Li L, Wang J, Zang J, Chen J, Xiao Y, et al. Head-to-head comparison of [⁶⁸Ga]Ga-P16-093 and 2-[¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50:1499–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-06101-3.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Sasikumar A, Joy A, Nanabala R, Unni M, Padmanabhan T. Complimentary pattern of uptake in ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and ⁶⁸Ga–prostate-specific membrane antigen PET/CT in a case of metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41:e517–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001394.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Siva S, Callahan J, Pryor D, Martin J, Lawrentschuk N, Hofman MS. Utility of ⁶⁸Ga prostate specific membrane antigen–positron emission tomography in diagnosis and response assessment of recurrent renal cell carcinoma. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2017;61:372–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12590.CrossRef

43.

Sandgren K, Johansson L, Axelsson J, Jonsson J, Ögren M, Ögren M, et al. Radiation dosimetry of [⁶⁸Ga]PSMA-11 in low-risk prostate cancer patients. EJNMMI physics. 2019;6:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-018-0239-2.CrossRef

44.

Quinn B, Dauer Z, Pandit-Taskar N, Schoder H, Dauer LT. Radiation dosimetry of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT: incorporating exam-specific parameters in dose estimates. BMC Med Imaging. 2016;16:41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-016-0143-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Judmann B, Braun D, Wängler B, Schirrmacher R, Fricker G, Wängler C. Current state of radiolabeled heterobivalent peptidic ligands in tumor imaging and therapy. Pharmaceuticals. 2020;13:173. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph13080173.CrossRefPubMedCentral

46.

Summer D, Rangger C, Klingler M, Laverman P, Franssen GM, Lechner BE, et al. Exploiting the concept of multivalency with ⁶⁸Ga-and ⁸⁹Zr-labelled fusarinine C-minigastrin bioconjugates for targeting CCK2R expression. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2018;2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3171794.

47.

Liu S, Liu Z, Chen K, Yan Y, Watzlowik P, Wester H-J, et al. ¹⁸F-Labeled Galacto and PEGylated RGD Dimers for PET Imaging of α_vβ₃ Integrin Expression. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12:530–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-009-0284-2.CrossRef

48.

Dijkgraaf I, Yim C-B, Franssen GM, Schuit RC, Luurtsema G, Liu S, et al. PET imaging of α_vβ₃ integrin expression in tumours with ⁶⁸Ga-labelled mono-, di- and tetrameric RGD peptides. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:128–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1615-x.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: [68Ga]Ga‑LNC1007 PET/CT in the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma: comparison with 2-[18F]FDG/[68Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT
verfasst von: Rong Lin
Chao Wang
Shaohao Chen
Tingting Lin
Hai Cai
Shaoming Chen
Yun Yang
Jiaying Zhang
Fuqi Xu
Jingjing Zhang
Xiaoyuan Chen
Jie Zang
Weibing Miao
Publikationsdatum: 20.09.2023
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 2/2024
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06436-5

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

[⁶⁸Ga]Ga‑LNC1007 PET/CT in the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma: comparison with 2-[¹⁸F]FDG/[⁶⁸Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2024

International consensus on clinical use of presynaptic dopaminergic positron emission tomography imaging in parkinsonism

Proliferation and apoptosis after whole-body irradiation: longitudinal PET study in a mouse model

Letter to the editor concerning “Reproducibility of [18F]FDG PET/CT liver SUV as reference or normalisation factor”

[18F]-mFBG imaging for COVID-19-induced cardiac sympathetic innervation impairment

Integrating TSPO PET imaging and transcriptomics to unveil the role of neuroinflammation and amyloid-β deposition in Alzheimer’s disease

Distinct subtypes of spatial brain metabolism patterns in Alzheimer’s disease identified by deep learning-based FDG PET clusters