Comparison of Integrated Whole-body [11C]choline PET/MR with PET/CT in Patients with Prostate Cancer

Overview

Journal Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

Specialties Biophysics
Nuclear Medicine
Radiology

Date 2013 Jul 3

PMID 23817684

Citations 51

Authors

Michael Souvatzoglou

Matthias Eiber

Toshiki Takei

Sebastian Furst

Tobias Maurer

Florian Gaertner

Hans Geinitz

Alexander Drzezga

Sibylle Ziegler

Stephan G Nekolla

Ernst J Rummeny

Markus Schwaiger

Ambros J Beer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of conventional [(11)C]choline PET/CT in comparison to that of simultaneous whole-body PET/MR.

Methods: The study population comprised 32 patients with prostate cancer who underwent a single-injection dual-imaging protocol with PET/CT and subsequent PET/MR. PET/CT scans were performed applying standard clinical protocols (5 min after injection of 793 ± 69 MBq [(11)C]choline, 3 min per bed position, intravenous contrast agent). Subsequently (52 ± 15 min after injection) PET/MR was performed (4 min per bed position). PET images were reconstructed iteratively (OSEM 3D), scatter and attenuation correction of emission data and regional allocation of [(11)C]choline foci were performed using CT data for PET/CT and segmented Dixon MR, T1 and T2 sequences for PET/MR. Image quality of the respective PET scans and PET alignment with the respective morphological imaging modality were compared using a four point scale (0-3). Furthermore, number, location and conspicuity of the detected lesions were evaluated. SUVs for suspicious lesions, lung, liver, spleen, vertebral bone and muscle were compared.

Results: Overall 80 lesions were scored visually in 29 of the 32 patients. There was no significant difference between the two PET scans concerning number or conspicuity of the detected lesions (p not significant). PET/MR with T1 and T2 sequences performed better than PET/CT in anatomical allocation of lesions (2.87 ± 0.3 vs. 2.72 ± 0.5; p = 0.005). The quality of PET/CT images (2.97 ± 0.2) was better than that of the respective PET scan of the PET/MR (2.69 ± 0.5; p = 0.007). Overall the maximum and mean lesional SUVs exhibited high correlations between PET/CT and PET/MR (ρ = 0.87 and ρ = 0.86, respectively; both p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Despite a substantially later imaging time-point, the performance of simultaneous PET/MR was comparable to that of PET/CT in detecting lesions with increased [(11)C]choline uptake in patients with prostate cancer. Anatomical allocation of lesions was better with simultaneous PET/MR than with PET/CT, especially in the bone and pelvis. These promising findings suggest that [(11)C]choline PET/MR might have a diagnostic benefit compared to PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer, and now needs to be further evaluated in prospective trials.

Citing Articles

Diagnostic Accuracy of Molecular Imaging Techniques for Detecting Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Alshamrani A Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(13).

PMID: 39001206 PMC: 11240585. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14131315.

The role of MRI in prostate cancer: current and future directions.

Fernandes M, Yildirim O, Woo S, Vargas H, Hricak H MAGMA. 2022; 35(4):503-521.

PMID: 35294642 PMC: 9378354. DOI: 10.1007/s10334-022-01006-6.

Molecular Imaging in Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer Patients: Current Aspects and Future Trends.

Manafi-Farid R, Ranjbar S, Jamshidi Araghi Z, Pilz J, Schweighofer-Zwink G, Pirich C Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(21).

PMID: 34771523 PMC: 8582501. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13215360.

Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI of Prostate Lesions of Simultaneous [Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI: Comparison between Intraprostatic Lesions and Correlation between Perfusion Parameters.

Zhao J, Kader A, Mangarova D, Brangsch J, Brenner W, Hamm B Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(6).

PMID: 33808685 PMC: 8003484. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13061404.

PET/MRI in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Evangelista L, Zattoni F, Cassarino G, Artioli P, Cecchin D, Dal Moro F Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020; 48(3):859-873.

PMID: 32901351 PMC: 8036222. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05025-0.

References

Schlemmer H, Pichler B, Krieg R, Heiss W . An integrated MR/PET system: prospective applications. Abdom Imaging. 2008; 34(6):668-74. PMC: 2774419. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-008-9450-2. View

Berthelsen A, Holm S, Loft A, Klausen T, Andersen F, Hojgaard L . PET/CT with intravenous contrast can be used for PET attenuation correction in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005; 32(10):1167-75. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-005-1784-1. View

Kinahan P, Townsend D, Beyer T, SASHIN D . Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys. 1998; 25(10):2046-53. DOI: 10.1118/1.598392. View

Beyer T, Antoch G, Blodgett T, Freudenberg L, Akhurst T, Mueller S . Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 30(4):588-96. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-002-1097-6. View

Goerres G, Kamel E, Heidelberg T, Schwitter M, Burger C, von Schulthess G . PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002; 29(3):351-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-001-0710-4. View

Jadvar H . Prostate cancer: PET with 18F-FDG, 18F- or 11C-acetate, and 18F- or 11C-choline. J Nucl Med. 2010; 52(1):81-9. PMC: 3012154. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.110.077941. View

Martinez-Moller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G, Bundschuh R, Chefdhotel C, Ziegler S . Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(4):520-6. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.054726. View

Schoder H, Larson S . Positron emission tomography for prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2004; 34(4):274-92. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2004.06.004. View

Yau Y, Chan W, Tam Y, Vernon P, Wong S, Coel M . Application of intravenous contrast in PET/CT: does it really introduce significant attenuation correction error?. J Nucl Med. 2005; 46(2):283-91. View

10.

Reske S, Blumstein N, Neumaier B, Gottfried H, Finsterbusch F, Kocot D . Imaging prostate cancer with 11C-choline PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006; 47(8):1249-54. View

11.

Freudenberg L, Antoch G, Schutt P, Beyer T, Jentzen W, Muller S . FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 31(3):325-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1375-y. View

12.

Nakamoto Y, Osman M, Cohade C, Marshall L, Links J, Kohlmyer S . PET/CT: comparison of quantitative tracer uptake between germanium and CT transmission attenuation-corrected images. J Nucl Med. 2002; 43(9):1137-43. View

13.

Weber W, Grosu A, Czernin J . Technology Insight: advances in molecular imaging and an appraisal of PET/CT scanning. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008; 5(3):160-70. DOI: 10.1038/ncponc1041. View

14.

Antoch G, Freudenberg L, Egelhof T, Stattaus J, Jentzen W, Debatin J . Focal tracer uptake: a potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. J Nucl Med. 2002; 43(10):1339-42. View

15.

Peng Z, Liu Q, Liu Q, Yao S, Meng L, Liu Q . [The value of dual time point 11C-choline PET-CT in differentiating malignant from benign lesion of mediastinum]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2008; 87(47):3317-20. View

16.

Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, Scattoni V, Bettinardi V, Cozzarini C . [(11)C]choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008; 35(6):1065-73. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-008-0716-2. View

17.

Reske S, Blumstein N, Glatting G . [11C]choline PET/CT imaging in occult local relapse of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007; 35(1):9-17. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-007-0530-2. View

18.

Hricak H, Choyke P, Eberhardt S, Leibel S, Scardino P . Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology. 2007; 243(1):28-53. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2431030580. View

19.

Wyss M, Weber B, Honer M, Spath N, Ametamey S, Westera G . 18F-choline in experimental soft tissue infection assessed with autoradiography and high-resolution PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 31(3):312-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1337-4. View

20.

Beer A, Eiber M, Souvatzoglou M, Schwaiger M, Krause B . Radionuclide and hybrid imaging of recurrent prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2010; 12(2):181-91. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70103-0. View