[18F]DCFPyL PET-MRI/CT for unveiling a molecularly defined oligorecurrent prostate cancer state amenable for curative-intent ablative therapy: study protocol for a phase II trial

Rachel M Glicksman, Ur Metser, John Valliant, Peter W Chung, Neil E Fleshner, Robert G Bristow, David Green, Antonio Finelli, Robert Hamilton, Teodor Stanescu, Douglas Hussey, Charles Catton, Mary Gospodarowicz, Padraig Warde, Andrew Bayley, Stephen Breen, Doug Vines, David A Jaffray, Alejando Berlin, Rachel M Glicksman, Ur Metser, John Valliant, Peter W Chung, Neil E Fleshner, Robert G Bristow, David Green, Antonio Finelli, Robert Hamilton, Teodor Stanescu, Douglas Hussey, Charles Catton, Mary Gospodarowicz, Padraig Warde, Andrew Bayley, Stephen Breen, Doug Vines, David A Jaffray, Alejando Berlin

Abstract

Introduction: The oligometastatic (OM) disease hypothesis of an intermediate metastatic state with limited distant disease deposits amenable for curative therapies remains debatable. Over a third of prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy and postoperative radiotherapy experience disease recurrence; these patients are considered incurable by current standards. Often the recurrence cannot be localised by conventional imaging (CT and bone scan). Combined anatomical imaging with CT and/or MR with positron emission tomography (PET) using a novel second-generation prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) probe, [18F]DCFPyL, is a promising imaging modality to unveil disease deposits in these patients. A new and earlier molecularly defined oligorecurrent (OR) state may be amenable to focal-targeted ablative curative-intent therapies, such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery, thereby significantly delaying or completely avoiding the need for palliative therapies in men with recurrent PCa after maximal local treatments.

Methods and analysis: This ongoing single-institution phase II study will enrol up to 75 patients total, to include up to 37 patients with response-evaluable disease, who have rising prostate-specific antigen (range 0.4-3.0 ng/mL) following maximal local therapies with no evidence of disease on conventional imaging. These patients will undergo [18F]DCFPyL PET-MR/CT imaging to detect disease deposits, which will then be treated with SABR or surgery. The primary endpoints are performance of [18F]DCFPyL PET-MR/CT, and treatment response rates following SABR or surgery. Demographics and disease characteristics will be summarised and analysed descriptively. Response rates will be described with waterfall plots and proportions.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional Research Ethics Board. All patients will provide written informed consent. [18F]DCFPyL has approval from Health Canada. The results of the study will be disseminated by the principal investigator. Patients will not be identifiable as individuals in any publication or presentation of this study.

Trial registration numbers: NCT03160794.

Keywords: prostate disease; radiation oncology; radiology & imaging.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: UM declares a competing interest with Point Biopharm Inc. as a consultant.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study schema. ADT, androgen deprivation therapy; PET, positron emission tomography; PSA, prostate specific antigen; PSMA, prostate-specific membrane antigen; PORT, post-operative radiotherapy; RadP, radical prostatectomy; SABR, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.

References

    1. Kachuri L, De P, Ellison LF, et al. . Cancer incidence, mortality and survival trends in Canada, 1970-2007. Chronic Dis Inj Can 2013;33:69–80.
    1. Kalbasi A, Li J, Berman A, et al. . Dose-Escalated irradiation and overall survival in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:897–906. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2316
    1. King CR. Adjuvant versus salvage radiotherapy for high-risk prostate cancer patients. Semin Radiat Oncol 2013;23:215–21. 10.1016/j.semradonc.2013.01.009
    1. Valicenti RK, Thompson I, Albertsen P, et al. . Adjuvant and salvage radiation therapy after prostatectomy: American Society for radiation Oncology/American urological association guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;86:822–8. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.05.029
    1. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Paradelo J, et al. . Adjuvant radiotherapy for pathologically advanced prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006;296:2329–35. 10.1001/jama.296.19.2329
    1. Lu-Yao GL, Potosky AL, Albertsen PC, et al. . Follow-Up prostate cancer treatments after radical prostatectomy: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:166–73. 10.1093/jnci/88.3-4.166
    1. Grossfeld GD, Stier DM, Flanders SC, et al. . Use of second treatment following definitive local therapy for prostate cancer: data from the caPSURE database. J Urol 1998;160:1398–404. 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62548-5
    1. Berlin A, Lalonde E, Sykes J, et al. . Nbn gain is predictive for adverse outcome following image-guided radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Oncotarget 2014;5:11081–90. 10.18632/oncotarget.2404
    1. Palma DA, Olson R, Harrow S, et al. . Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus standard of care palliative treatment in patients with oligometastatic cancers (SABR-COMET): a randomised, phase 2, open-label trial. Lancet 2019;393:2051–8. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32487-5
    1. Gomez DR, Tang C, Zhang J, et al. . Local consolidative therapy vs. maintenance therapy or observation for patients with oligometastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: long-term results of a multi-institutional, phase II, randomized study. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:1558–65. 10.1200/JCO.19.00201
    1. Immediate versus deferred treatment for advanced prostatic cancer: initial results of the medical Research Council trial. the medical Research Council prostate cancer Working Party Investigators group. Br J Urol 1997;79:235–46. 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1997.d01-6840.x
    1. Gundem G, Van Loo P, Kremeyer B, et al. . The evolutionary history of lethal metastatic prostate cancer. Nature 2015;520:353–7. 10.1038/nature14347
    1. Hong MKH, Macintyre G, Wedge DC, et al. . Tracking the origins and drivers of subclonal metastatic expansion in prostate cancer. Nat Commun 2015;6:6605. 10.1038/ncomms7605
    1. Ost P, Bossi A, Decaestecker K, et al. . Metastasis-directed therapy of regional and distant recurrences after curative treatment of prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015;67:852–63. 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.004
    1. Reeves F, Murphy D, Evans C, et al. . Targeted local therapy in oligometastatic prostate cancer: a promising potential opportunity after failed primary treatment. BJU Int 2015;116:170–2. 10.1111/bju.12957
    1. Ost P, Reynders D, Decaestecker K, et al. . Surveillance or Metastasis-Directed therapy for oligometastatic prostate cancer recurrence: a prospective, randomized, multicenter phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:446–53. 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.4853
    1. Steuber T, Jilg C, Tennstedt P, et al. . Standard of care versus Metastases-directed therapy for PET-detected nodal oligorecurrent prostate cancer following multimodality treatment: a multi-institutional case-control study. Eur Urol Focus 2019;5:1007–13. 10.1016/j.euf.2018.02.015
    1. Palma DA, Olson RA, Harrow S, et al. . Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy for the comprehensive treatment of oligometastatic tumors (SABR-COMET): results of a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018;102:S3–4. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.06.105
    1. Parker CC, James ND, Brawley CD, et al. . Radiotherapy to the primary tumour for newly diagnosed, metastatic prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2018;392:2353–66. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32486-3
    1. Salama JK, Kirkpatrick JP, Yin F-F. Stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment of extracranial metastases. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2012;9:654–65. 10.1038/nrclinonc.2012.166
    1. Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Takei T, et al. . Comparison of integrated whole-body [11C]choline PET/MR with PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;40:1486–99. 10.1007/s00259-013-2467-y
    1. Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Schlemmer HP, et al. . Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41:887–97. 10.1007/s00259-013-2660-z
    1. Umbehr MH, Müntener M, Hany T, et al. . The role of 11C-choline and 18F-fluorocholine positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2013;64:106–17. 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.019
    1. Fanti S, Minozzi S, Castellucci P, et al. . PET/CT with (11)C-choline for evaluation of prostate cancer patients with biochemical recurrence: meta-analysis and critical review of available data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:55–69. 10.1007/s00259-015-3202-7
    1. Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, et al. . Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41:11–20. 10.1007/s00259-013-2525-5
    1. Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, et al. . Prospective comparison of 18F-Fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med 2015;56:1185–90. 10.2967/jnumed.115.160382
    1. Szabo Z, Mena E, Rowe SP, et al. . Initial Evaluation of [(18)F]DCFPyL for Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-Targeted PET Imaging of Prostate Cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2015;17:565–74. 10.1007/s11307-015-0850-8
    1. Metser U, Golan O, Levine CD, et al. . Tumor lesion detection: when is integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography more accurate than side-by-side interpretation of positron emission tomography and computed tomography? J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29:554–9. 10.1097/01.rct.0000164671.96143.c2
    1. Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:1–10. 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9
    1. Casamassima F, Masi L, Menichelli C, et al. . Efficacy of eradicative radiotherapy for limited nodal metastases detected with choline PET scan in prostate cancer patients. Tumori 2011;97:49–55. 10.1177/030089161109700110
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. . Spirit 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 2013;158:200–7. 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다