Abstract
Purpose
The aim of the study was to assess the utility of 18F-fluorocholine (FCH), compared to standard imaging of bone scan (BS) and contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), in patients with castration-resistant prostate carcinoma.
Methods
FCH has shown promise as a metabolic imaging agent for prostate carcinoma. Twenty-six patients with castration-resistant prostate carcinoma had FCH, BS and CT imaging within a 2-month period. Individual FCH-positive lesions in bone were compared to the BS and soft tissue lesions were compared to CT. The lesions were then classified as concordant or discordant for the presence or absence of prostate cancer metastases. Discordant bone or soft tissue lesions were followed up with BS or CT, respectively, at 6-month intervals for up to 2 years or until a definitive diagnosis of the discordant lesion could be made.
Results
In 13 (50%) of the patients, all lesions identified were concordant; this included 5 patients in whom no lesions could be identified with any imaging modality. In 21 patients, 183 lesions were observed with 149 being concordant and 34 (19%) being discordant (13 patients). Based on follow-up, FCH correctly identified the presence or absence of disease in 27 of 34 lesions, and in 14 cases FCH-positive lesions, not identified on initial imaging, were confirmed as disease on follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive and negative predictive values for lesion detection by FCH are 96% (92–98%), 96% (81–99%), 96% (93–97%), 99% (96–100%) and 81% (64–88%), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals shown in parentheses.
Conclusion
In this patient cohort, FCH shows good initial concordance (81%) with BS and CT in the detection of metastatic prostate carcinoma. Follow-up of the cases where FCH was initially discordant with subsequent BS or CT shows that FCH was accurate in determining the presence or absence of prostate metastasis in 79% of lesions. While FCH imaging as compared to BS and CT in this patient group has a good sensitivity and specificity for the detection of lesions representing prostate metastasis, further prospective studies are needed to determine its role.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kotzerke J, Gschwend JE, Neumaier B. PET for prostate cancer imaging: still a quandary or the ultimate solution? J Nucl Med 2002;43:200–2.
Hoh CK, Seltzer MA, Franklin J, deKernion JB, Phelps ME, Belldegrun A. Positron emission tomography in urological oncology. J Urol 1998;159:347–56.
Mathews D, Oz OK. Positron emission tomography in prostate and renal cell carcinoma. Curr Opin Urol 2002;12:381–5.
Effert PJ, Bares R, Handt S, Wolff JM, Büll U, Jakse G. Metabolic imaging of untreated prostate cancer by positron emission tomography with 18fluorine-labeled deoxyglucose. J Urol 1996;155:994–8.
Shreve PD, Grossman HB, Gross MD, Wahl RL. Metastatic prostate cancer: initial findings of PET with 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose. Radiology 1996;199:751–6.
Schöder H, Larson SM. Positron emission tomography for prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:274–92.
Kato T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y, Takei T, Shiga T, Shinohara N, et al. Accumulation of [11C]acetate in normal prostate and benign prostatic hyperplasia: comparison with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1492–5.
Schmid DT, John H, Zweifel R, Cservenyak T, Westera G, Goerres GW, et al. Fluorocholine PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer: initial experience. Radiology 2005;235:623–8.
de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg W, Mensink HJA. 11C-choline positron emission tomography for the evaluation after treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2003;44:32–8. discussion 38–9.
Fricke E, Machtens S, Hofmann M, van den Hoff J, Bergh S, Brunkhorst T, et al. Positron emission tomography with 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:607–11.
Bouchelouche K, Oehr P. Recent developments in urologic oncology: positron emission tomography molecular imaging. Curr Opin Oncol 2008;20:321–6.
Hara T. 18F-Fluorocholine: a new oncologic PET tracer. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1815–7.
DeGrado TR, Coleman RE, Wang S, Baldwin SW, Orr MD, Robertson CN, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of 18F-labeled choline as an oncologic tracer for positron emission tomography: initial findings in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:110–7.
Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. Development of (18)F-fluoroethylcholine for cancer imaging with PET: synthesis, biochemistry, and prostate cancer imaging. J Nucl Med 2002;43:187–99.
DeGrado TR, Reiman RE, Price DT, Wang S, Coleman RE. Pharmacokinetics and radiation dosimetry of 18F-fluorocholine. J Nucl Med 2002;43:92–6.
Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Fitz F, Nader M, Loidl W, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1766–74.
Cimitan M, Borsatti E, Tatta R, Drigo A, Rampin L, Rubello D. Uptake of 18F-fluorocholine (FCH) by bone metastases of prostate carcinoma: what’s the best timing for FCH PET acquisition. J Nucl Med 2005;46 Suppl 2:432.
Schillaci O, Calabria F, Tavolozza M, Cicciò C, Carlani M, Caracciolo CR, et al. 18F-choline PET/CT physiological distribution and pitfalls in image interpretation: experience in 80 patients with prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2010;31:39–45.
Beheshti M, Imamovic L, Broinger G, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Stoiber F, et al. 18F choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. Radiology 2010;254:925–33.
Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P, Picchio M, Corti B, Briganti A, et al. 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for preoperative lymph-node staging in intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer: comparison with clinical staging nomograms. Eur Urol 2008;54:392–401.
Poulsen MH, Bouchelouche K, Gerke O, Petersen H, Svolgaard B, Marcussen N, et al. [(18)F]-fluorocholine positron-emission/computed tomography for lymph node staging of patients with prostate cancer: preliminary results of a prospective study. BJU Int 2010;Epub ahead of print.
Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Fitz F, Nader M, Hammer J, et al. The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT. Mol Imaging Biol 2010;12:98–107.
Price DT, Coleman RE, Liao RP, Robertson CN, Polascik TJ, DeGrado TR. Comparison of [18 F]fluorocholine and [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose for positron emission tomography of androgen dependent and androgen independent prostate cancer. J Urol 2002;168:273–80.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the Royal Perth Hospital Medical Research Foundation for the generous grant to allow completion of this trial.
Declarations
All human studies have been approved by the appropriate Ethics Committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. All persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McCarthy, M., Siew, T., Campbell, A. et al. 18F-Fluoromethylcholine (FCH) PET imaging in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: prospective comparison with standard imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38, 14–22 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1579-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1579-x