Advances in Radiation Oncology (Sep 2023)

Using 18F-DCFPyL Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen–Directed Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Define Intraprostatic Boosts for Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

  • John M. Floberg, MD, PhD,
  • Shane A. Wells, MD,
  • Diane Ojala, CMD,
  • R. Adam Bayliss, PhD,
  • Patrick M. Hill, PhD,
  • Brett A. Morris, MD, PhD,
  • Zachary S. Morris, MD, PhD,
  • Mark Ritter, MD, PhD,
  • Steve Y. Cho, MD

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8, no. 5
p. 101241

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: The recently reported FLAME trial demonstrated a biochemical disease-free survival benefit to using a focal intraprostatic boost to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)–identified lesions in men with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive radiation therapy. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)–directed positron emission tomography (PET) may identify additional areas of disease. In this work, we investigated using both PSMA PET and mpMRI in planning focal intraprostatic boosts using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods and Materials: We evaluated a cohort of patients (n = 13) with localized prostate cancer who were imaged with 2-(3-(1-carboxy-5-[(6-[18F]fluoro-pyridine-2-carbonyl)-amino]-pentyl)-ureido)-pentanedioic acid (18F-DCFPyL) PET/MRI on a prospective imaging trial before undergoing definitive therapy. The number of lesions concordant (overlapping) and discordant (no overlap) on PET and MRI was assessed. Overlap between concordant lesions was evaluated using the Dice and Jaccard similarity coefficients. Prostate SBRT plans were created fusing the PET/MRI imaging to computed tomography scans acquired the same day. Plans were created using only MRI-identified lesions, only PET-identified lesions, and the combined PET/MRI lesions. Coverage of the intraprostatic lesions and doses to the rectum and urethra were assessed for each of these plans. Results: The majority of lesions (21/39, 53.8%) were discordant between MRI and PET, with more lesions seen by PET alone (12) than MRI alone (9). Of lesions that were concordant between PET and MRI, there were still areas that did not overlap between scans (average Dice coefficient, 0.34). Prostate SBRT planning using all lesions to define a focal intraprostatic boost provided the best coverage of all lesions without compromising constraints on the rectum and urethra. Conclusions: Using both mpMRI and PSMA-directed PET may better identify all areas of gross disease within the prostate. Using both imaging modalities could improve the planning of focal intraprostatic boosts.