Radiation Oncology (Apr 2024)

Impact of FAPI-46/dual-tracer PET/CT imaging on radiotherapeutic management in esophageal cancer

  • Simone Wegen,
  • Karina Claus,
  • Philipp Linde,
  • Johannes Rosenbrock,
  • Maike Trommer,
  • Thomas Zander,
  • Armin Tuchscherer,
  • Christiane Bruns,
  • Hans Anton Schlößer,
  • Wolfgang Schröder,
  • Marie-Lisa Eich,
  • Thomas Fischer,
  • Klaus Schomäcker,
  • Alexander Drzezga,
  • Carsten Kobe,
  • Katrin Sabine Roth,
  • Jasmin Josefine Weindler

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-024-02430-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Fibroblast activation protein (FAP) is expressed in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of various cancers. In our analysis, we describe the impact of dual-tracer imaging with Gallium-68-radiolabeled inhibitors of FAP (FAPI-46-PET/CT) and fluorodeoxy-D-glucose (FDG-PET/CT) on the radiotherapeutic management of primary esophageal cancer (EC). Methods 32 patients with EC, who are scheduled for chemoradiation, received FDG and FAPI-46 PET/CT on the same day (dual-tracer protocol, 71%) or on two separate days (29%) We compared functional tumor volumes (FTVs), gross tumor volumes (GTVs) and tumor stages before and after PET-imaging. Changes in treatment were categorized as “minor” (adaption of radiation field) or “major” (change of treatment regimen). Immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining for FAP was performed in all patients with available tissue. Results Primary tumor was detected in all FAPI-46/dual-tracer scans and in 30/32 (93%) of FDG scans. Compared to the initial staging CT scan, 12/32 patients (38%) were upstaged in nodal status after the combination of FDG and FAPI-46 PET scans. Two lymph node metastases were only visible in FAPI-46/dual-tracer. New distant metastasis was observed in 2/32 (6%) patients following FAPI-4 -PET/CT. Our findings led to larger RT fields (“minor change”) in 5/32 patients (16%) and changed treatment regimen (“major change”) in 3/32 patients after FAPI-46/dual-tracer PET/CT. GTVs were larger in FAPI-46/dual-tracer scans compared to FDG-PET/CT (mean 99.0 vs. 80.3 ml, respectively (p < 0.001)) with similar results for nuclear medical FTVs. IHC revealed heterogenous FAP-expression in all specimens (mean H-score: 36.3 (SD 24.6)) without correlation between FAP expression in IHC and FAPI tracer uptake in PET/CT. Conclusion We report first data on the use of PET with FAPI-46 for patients with EC, who are scheduled to receive RT. Tumor uptake was high and not depending on FAP expression in TME. Further, FAPI-46/dual-tracer PET had relevant impact on management in this setting. Our data calls for prospective evaluation of FAPI-46/dual-tracer PET to improve clinical outcomes of EC.

Keywords