Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
LetterLetters to the Editor

Tumor Sink Effect: Myth or Reality?

Andrei Gafita, Jeremie Calais, Wolfgang P. Fendler and Matthias Eiber
Journal of Nuclear Medicine July 2022, 63 (7) 1124; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.122.264119
Andrei Gafita
*UCLA Los Angeles, California E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: agafita@mednet.ucla.edu
Jeremie Calais
*UCLA Los Angeles, California E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: agafita@mednet.ucla.edu
Wolfgang P. Fendler
*UCLA Los Angeles, California E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: agafita@mednet.ucla.edu
Matthias Eiber
*UCLA Los Angeles, California E-mail:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: agafita@mednet.ucla.edu
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

TO THE EDITOR: We thank Prive et al. for their correspondence. As acknowledged in our publication (1), the main limitation of the study is the use of a single-time-point SUV measurement as a surrogate for radiation dose. Differential prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) uptake patterns and tumor-to-background ratios are observed when PSMA PET image acquisition is performed at late time points in comparison to images acquired at 1 h after injection (2–5). Thus, it is clear that images acquired 1 h after injection cannot reflect the biologic effects of 177Lu-PSMA that occur over more than 3 wk (biologic half-life). However, even if not perfectly accurate, PSMA PET imaging performed at 1 h still provides a fair estimate of the patient target expression and of the biodistribution of a PSMA-targeted radiopharmaceutical, and prior studies have reported that pretherapeutic PSMA PET measurements may be correlated with radiation dose to tumor and normal organs from 177Lu-PSMA therapy (6–8).

Regarding the definition of low- and high-volume disease, it is important to note that CHAARTED and LATTITUDE criteria were based on conventional imaging (9). Applying these criteria for an analysis of PSMA PET can lead to major discordance in patient stratification, as described previously (10). Therefore, we recommend explicit use of the term PSMA-VOL in reference to the whole-body PSMA PET volumetric assessment and not just low-volume or high-volume metastatic, as follows: very low PSMA-VOL (<25 cm3), low PSMA-VOL (25–188 cm3), moderate PSMA-VOL (189–531 cm3), high PSMA-VOL (532–1,354 cm3), and very high PSMA-VOL (≥1,355 cm3).

As the authors mention, we agree that patients with low-volume metastatic disease or oligometastases can safely benefit from PSMA-based radionuclide therapy without decreasing the commonly applied dose-activity level of 7.4 GBq per cycle currently in use in the ongoing trial NCT04443062 and as supported by preliminary data (11). On the other hand, our results suggest that the dose-activity level of 177Lu-PSMA could be increased safely in patients with very high PSMA-VOL (≥1,355 cm3). Nevertheless, these findings warrant further validation by dosimetry studies and safety assessments in prospective clinical trials.

Footnotes

  • Published online Apr. 28, 2022.

  • © 2022 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Gafita A,
    2. Wang H,
    3. Robertson A,
    4. et al
    . Tumor sink effect in 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET: myth or reality? J Nucl Med. 2022;63:226–232.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Rosar F,
    2. Bartholomä M,
    3. Maus S,
    4. et al
    . 89Zr-PSMA-617 PET/CT may reveal local recurrence of prostate cancer unidentified by 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2022;47:435–436.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.
    1. Beheshti M,
    2. Manafi-Farid R,
    3. Geinitz H,
    4. et al
    . Multiphasic 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the detection of early recurrence in prostate cancer patients with a PSA level of less than 1 ng/mL: a prospective study of 135 patients. J Nucl Med. 2020;61:1484–1490.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.
    1. Hohberg M,
    2. Kobe C,
    3. Täger P,
    4. et al
    . Combined early and late [68Ga]PSMA-HBED-CC PET scans improve lesion detectability in biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer with low PSA levels. Mol Imaging Biol. 2019;21:558–566.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Alberts I,
    2. Prenosil G,
    3. Mingels C,
    4. et al
    . Feasibility of late acquisition [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT using a long axial field-of-view PET/CT scanner for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: first clinical experiences. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:4456–4462.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    1. Wang J,
    2. Zang J,
    3. Wang H,
    4. et al
    . Pretherapeutic 68Ga-PSMA-617 PET may indicate the dosimetry of 177Lu-PSMA-617 and 177Lu-EB-PSMA-617 in main organs and tumor lesions. Clin Nucl Med. 2019;44:431–438.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.
    1. Violet J,
    2. Jackson P,
    3. Ferdinandus J,
    4. et al
    . Dosimetry of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: correlations between pretherapeutic imaging and whole-body tumor dosimetry with treatment outcomes. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:517–523.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Peters SMB,
    2. Hofferber R,
    3. Privé BM,
    4. et al
    . [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging as a predictor for absorbed doses in organs at risk and small lesions in [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 treatment. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:1101–1112.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Cornford P,
    2. van den Bergh RCN,
    3. Briers E,
    4. et al
    . EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II—2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79:263–282.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    1. Barbato F,
    2. Fendler WP,
    3. Rauscher I,
    4. et al
    . PSMA-PET for the assessment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer volume of disease. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:1747–1750.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Privé BM,
    2. Peters SMB,
    3. Muselaers CHJ,
    4. et al
    . Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 in low-volume hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer: a prospective pilot study. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27:3595–3601.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 63 (7)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 63, Issue 7
July 1, 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Tumor Sink Effect: Myth or Reality?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Tumor Sink Effect: Myth or Reality?
Andrei Gafita, Jeremie Calais, Wolfgang P. Fendler, Matthias Eiber
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2022, 63 (7) 1124; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.122.264119

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Tumor Sink Effect: Myth or Reality?
Andrei Gafita, Jeremie Calais, Wolfgang P. Fendler, Matthias Eiber
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2022, 63 (7) 1124; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.122.264119
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • First-Strike Rapid Predictive Dosimetry and Dose Response for 177Lu-PSMA Therapy in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Business Model Beats Science and Logic: Dosimetry and Paucity of Its Use
  • Determining PSMA-617 Mass and Molar Activity in Pluvicto Doses
  • The Value of Functional PET in Quantifying Neurotransmitter Dynamics
Show more Letters to the Editor

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire