Search

Objective: Patients with bladder cancer (BC) are at risk of developing upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Therefore, CT urography is recommended for follow-up. To avoid intravenous contrast agents, retrograde pyelography (RPG) is an alternative. However, it is still unclear whether RPG increases the incidence of UTUC. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of RPG in the presence of BC on the risk of developing UTUC. Patients and Methods: Retrospectively analysing a total of 3,680 RPGs between 2009 and 2016, all patients with simultaneous BC (group 1) and those without synchronous BC (group 2) during RPG were compared. All patients were risk stratified according to the EORTC bladder calculator. In patients without BC during RPG, risk stratification was based on the worst prior tumour characteristics. Results: A total of 145 patients with a history of BC were analysed. Of these, 112 patients underwent RPG with simultaneous BC. UTUC developed in 6 of 112 patients (5.4%) and 58.9% (66/112) had high-risk BC according to the EORTC bladder calculator. In the control group, one out of 33 (3%) patients with metachronous high-risk BC developed UTUC. Conclusions: Using RPG in the presence of BC did not increase the risk of UTUC. Due to the predominant number of high-risk/high-grade tumours, individual tumour biology appears to be the primary driver for the development of UTUC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intraoperative identification of positive resection margins (PRMs) in high-risk prostate cancer (PC) needs improvement. Cerenkov luminescence imaging (CLI) with 68 Ga-PSMA-11 is promising, although limited by low residual activity and artificial signals. Here, we aimed to assess the value of CLI and flexible autoradiography (FAR) with 18 F-PSMA-1007. Methods: Mice bearing subcutaneous PSMA-avid RM1-PGLS tumors were administered 18 F-PSMA-1007, and PET/CT was performed. After the animals had been killed, organs were excised and measured signals in CLI and FAR CLI were correlated with tracer activity concentrations (ACs) obtained from PET/CT. For clinical assessment, 7 high-risk PC patients underwent radical prostatectomy immediately after preoperative 18 F-PSMA PET/CT. Contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were calculated for both imaging modalities in intact specimens and after incision above the index lesion. Results: In the heterotopic in vivo mouse model ( n = 5), CLI did not detect any lesion. FAR CLI detected a distinct signal in all mice, with a lowest AC of 7.25 kBq/mL (CNR, 5.48). After incision above the index lesion of the prostate specimen, no increased signal was observed at the cancer area in CLI. In contrast, using FAR CLI, a signal was detectable in 6 of 7 patients. The AC in the missed index lesion was 1.85 kBq/mL, resulting in a detection limit of at least 2.06 kBq/mL. Histopathology demonstrated 2 PRMs, neither of which was predicted by CLI or FAR CLI. Conclusion: 18 F-PSMA FAR CLI was superior to CLI in tracer-related signal detectability. PC was could be visualized in radical prostatectomy down to 2.06 kBq/mL. However, the detection of PRMs was limited. Direct anatomic correlation of FAR CLI is challenging because of the scintillator overlay., (© 2023 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Cerenkov luminescence imaging (CLI) was successfully implemented in the intraoperative context as a form of radioguided cancer surgery, showing promise in the detection of surgical margins during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. The present study was designed to provide a quantitative description of the occupational radiation exposure of surgery and histopathology personnel from CLI-guided robot-assisted radical prostatectomy after the injection of 68 Ga-PSMA-11 in a single-injection PET/CT CLI protocol. Methods: Ten patients with preoperative 68 Ga-PSMA-11 administration and intraoperative CLI were included. Patient dose rate was measured before PET/CT ( n  = 10) and after PET/CT ( n  = 5) at a 1-m distance for 4 patient regions (head [A], right side [B], left side [C], and feet [D]). Electronic personal dosimetry (EPD) was used for intraoperative occupational exposure ( n  = 10). Measurements included the first surgical assistant and scrub nurse at the operating table and the CLI imager/surgeon at the robotic console and encompassed the whole duration of surgery and CLI image acquisition. An estimation of the exposure of histopathology personnel was performed by measuring prostate specimens ( n  = 8) with a germanium detector. Results: The measured dose rate value before PET/CT was 5.3 ± 0.9 (average ± SD) μSv/h. This value corresponds to a patient-specific dose rate constant for positions B and C of 0.047 μSv/h⋅MBq. The average dose rate value after PET/CT was 1.04 ± 1.00 μSv/h. The patient-specific dose rate constant values corresponding to regions A to D were 0.011, 0.026, 0.024, and 0.003 μSv/h⋅MBq, respectively. EPD readings revealed average personal equivalent doses of 9.0 ± 7.1, 3.3 ± 3.9, and 0.7 ± 0.7 μSv for the first surgical assistant, scrub nurse, and CLI imager/surgeon, respectively. The median germanium detector-measured activity of the prostate specimen was 2.96 kBq (interquartile range, 2.23-7.65 kBq). Conclusion: Single-injection 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT CLI procedures are associated with a reasonable occupational exposure level, if kept under 110 procedures per year. Excised prostate specimen radionuclide content was below the exemption level for 68 Ga. Dose rate-based calculations provide a robust estimation for EPD measurements., (© 2022 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Background: Intraoperative Cerenkov luminescence imaging (CLI) is a novel technique to assess surgical margins in patients undergoing nerve sparing radical prostatectomy (RP). Here, we analyze the efficacy of a 550-nm optical short-pass filter (OF) to improve its performance., Methods: In this prospective single-center feasibility study ten patients with prostate cancer (PC) were included between December 2019 and April 2020, including three patients without tracer injection as a control group. After preoperative injection of 68-Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 followed by RP, CLI of the excised prostate and the incised index lesion was performed to visualize the primary tumor lesion. We compared the findings on intraoperative CLI to postoperative histopathology. Furthermore, CLI-intensities determined as tumor to background ratio (TBR) and contrast to noise ratio (CNR) were measured., Results: Histopathology proved positive surgical margins (PSM) in 3 patients with corresponding findings in CLI. After magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-informed incision above the index lesion 2 out of 3 prostates demonstrated elevated CLI signals with histopathological confirmation of PC cells. The use of the OF enabled a significant reduction of the area of the regions of interest from a median of 1.80 to 0.15 cm 2 (reduction by 85%, P=0.005) leading to increased specificity. Signals due to PSMs were not suppressed by the 550-nm OF. The median TBR was reduced from 3.33 to 2.10. In all three patients of the control group elevated CLI intensities were detected at locations with diathermal energy deposition during surgery. After application of the 550-nm OF these were almost totally suppressed with a TBR of 1.10. Measurements of Cerenkov luminescence intensity with the 550-nm OF showed a significant Pearson's correlation of 0.82 between PSM and the elevated TBR (P=0.003) and a significant Pearson's correlation of 0.66 between PSM and elevated CNR (P=0.04). Measurements without the OF did not correlate significantly., Conclusions: Intraoperative 68-Ga-PSMA CLI in PC is a tool that warrants further investigation to visualize PSM especially in intermediate and high-risk PC. Intraoperative CLI benefits from usage of a 550-nm OF to reduce false-positive signals., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1141). The series “Management of Advanced Genitourinary Malignancies” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. Dr. CK reports personal fees from Bristol-Myer-Squibb, outside the submitted work; Dr. NNH reports personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Intuitive Surgical, personal fees from LightPoint Medical, outside the submitted work; Dr. HR reports personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Philips, other from Bayer, outside the submitted work; Dr. WPF reports personal fees from RadioMedix, personal fees from Parexel, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from BTG, personal fees from Endocyte, during the conduct of the study; Dr. KH reports personal fees from Bayer, personal fees and other from Sofie Biosciences, personal fees from SIRTEX, non-financial support from ABX, personal fees from Adacap, personal fees from Curium, personal fees from Endocyte, grants and personal fees from BTG, personal fees from IPSEN, personal fees from Siemens Healthineers, personal fees from GE Healthcare, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from ymabs, outside the submitted work; Dr. Radtke reports personal fees from Invivo, personal fees from Uronav, personal fees from Bender group, personal fees from Becklemann and Partners, personal fees from Saegeling Medizintechnik, other from Advanced Accelerator Applications, other from Novartis, outside the submitted work; Dr. BAH reports personal fees from ABX, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees and non-financial support from Lightpoint medical, Inc., personal fees and non-financial support from Janssen R&D, grants from German Research Foundation, during the conduct of the study; personal fees and non-financial support from Bayer, personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. ST reports personal fees and other from Ipsen, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Bristol-Myers-Squibb, personal fees from BrachySolutions, outside the submitted work. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.)