BACKGROUND: 68 Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is a recommended imaging modality for patients with recurrent prostate cancer (PCa). Its routine implementation before radical prostatectomy (RP) may allow avoiding undertreatment. We aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT for pelvic lymph node metastases in a large cohort of patients treated with RP and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) for high-risk PCa. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of an institutional database of patients who underwent 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT before RP and ePLND for high-risk PCa. The diagnostic estimates of 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for lymph node involvement were calculated. RESULTS: We included 165 high-risk PCa patients. The median PSA value was 24.5 ng/mL (range: 6.7-185) and all the patients had biopsy Grade Group 4-5. In total, 46 (28%) of patients had clinical lymph node involvement at 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT. A mean number of resected lymph nodes per patient was 22 (range: 15-45) and 149 (4.2%) of all resected nodes were positive for lymph node metastasis at final pathology. The diagnostic estimates for the detection of pN+ disease at RP were as follows: sensitivity 63% (95% CI: 51-75), specificity 97% (95% CI: 91-99), positive predictive value 94% (95% CI: 82-99), and negative predictive value 79% (95% CI: 70-86). The total accuracy of PSMA-PET was 83% (95% CI: 76-88). CONCLUSION: Our analyses support high specificity and positive predictive value of pretreatment 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT for the detection of pelvic lymph node metastasis in patients treated with RP for high-risk PCa. While a positive finding should be considered as robust indicator for clinical decision-making, a negative result cannot reliably rule out the presence of lymph node involvement in high-risk PCa; there is a need for advanced risk stratification in those patients.

Department of Nuclear Medicine Faculty of Medicine University Hospital Cologne Cologne Germany

Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Department of Urology Medical University of Silesia Zabrze Poland

Department of Urology Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Dallas Texas USA

Department of Urology Uro Oncology Robot Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery University Hospital Cologne Cologne Germany

Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York New York USA

Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research Al Ahliyya Amman University Amman Jordan

Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia

See more in PubMed

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020;70(1):7-30. doi:10.3322/caac.21590

Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):243-262. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042

Punnen S, Cooperberg MR. The epidemiology of high-risk prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23(4):331-336. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e328361d48e

Rider JR, Sandin F, Andrén O, Wiklund P, Hugosson J, Stattin P. Long-term outcomes among noncuratively treated men according to prostate cancer risk category in a nationwide, population-based study. Eur Urol. 2013;63(1):88-96. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.001

Aydh A, Motlagh RS, Abufaraj M, et al. Radiation therapy compared to radical prostatectomy as first-line definitive therapy for patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Arab J Urol. 2022;20(2):71-80. doi:10.1080/2090598x.2022.2026010

Rajwa P, Pradere B, Gandaglia G, et al. Intensification of systemic therapy in addition to definitive local treatment in nonmetastatic unfavourable prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2022;82(1):82-96. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2022.03.031

Chierigo F, Wenzel M, Würnschimmel C, et al. Survival after radical prostatectomy versus radiation therapy in high-risk and very high-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2022;207(2):375-384. doi:10.1097/ju.0000000000002250

Marra G, Karnes RJ, Calleris G, et al. Oncological outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer in the contemporary era: a multicenter retrospective study. Urol Oncol. 2021;39(5):296.e21-296.e29. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.11.002

Hope TA, Eiber M, Armstrong WR, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET for pelvic nodal metastasis detection prior to radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a multicenter prospective phase 3 imaging trial. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(11):1635-1642. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3771

Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, 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. Lancet. 2020;395(10231):1208-1216. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30314-7

Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77(4):403-417. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049

Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, et al. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(2):134-149. doi:10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.001

Heidenreich A. Still unanswered: the role of extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in improving oncological outcomes in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5):605-606. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2021.01.033

Marra G, Valerio M, Heidegger I, et al. Management of patients with node-positive prostate cancer at radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a systematic review. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020;3(5):565-581. doi:10.1016/j.euo.2020.08.005

Gandaglia G, Mazzone E, Stabile A, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen radioguided surgery to detect nodal metastases in primary prostate cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection: results of a planned interim analysis of a prospective phase 2 study. Eur Urol. 2022;82(4):411-418. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2022.06.002

de Galiza Barbosa F, Queiroz MA, Nunes RF, et al. Nonprostatic diseases on PSMA PET imaging: a spectrum of benign and malignant findings. Cancer Imaging. 2020;20(1):23. doi:10.1186/s40644-020-00300-7

Moschini M, Briganti A, Murphy CR, et al. Outcomes for patients with clinical lymphadenopathy treated with radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(2):193-196. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.047

Attard G, Murphy L, Clarke NW, et al. Abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with or without enzalutamide for high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of primary results from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials of the STAMPEDE platform protocol. Lancet. 2022;399(10323):447-460. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02437-5

van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, et al. Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017;119(2):209-215. doi:10.1111/bju.13540

Gandaglia G, Barletta F, Robesti D, et al. Identification of the optimal candidates for nodal staging with extended pelvic lymph node dissection among prostate cancer patients who underwent preoperative prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography. external validation of the memorial sloan kettering cancer center and briganti nomograms and development of a novel tool. Eur Urol Oncol. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.euo.2023.05.003

Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh QD, et al. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5):595-604. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040

Touijer KA, Sjoberg DD, Benfante N, et al. Limited versus extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(4):532-539. doi:10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.006

Grubmüller B, Jahrreiss V, Brönimann S, et al. Salvage radical prostatectomy for radio-recurrent prostate cancer: an updated systematic review of oncologic, histopathologic and functional outcomes and predictors of good response. Curr Oncol. 2021;28(4):2881-2892. doi:10.3390/curroncol28040252

Sooriakumaran P, Narain TA, Davda R. Pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of radical prostatectomy: extended? Of course not. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2022;44:18-19. doi:10.1016/j.euros.2022.06.014

Soeterik TFW, Wever L, Dijksman LM, et al. Clinical trial protocol for PSMA-SELECT: a Dutch national randomised study of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography as a triage tool for pelvic lymph node dissection in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8(5):1198-1203. doi:10.1016/j.euf.2021.11.003