Back to Search Start Over

18 F-AlF-NOTA-Octreotide Outperforms 68 Ga-DOTATATE/NOC PET in Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients: Results from a Prospective, Multicenter Study.

Authors :
Pauwels E
Cleeren F
Tshibangu T
Koole M
Serdons K
Boeckxstaens L
Dekervel J
Vandamme T
Lybaert W
den Broeck BV
Laenen A
Clement PM
Geboes K
Cutsem EV
Stroobants S
Verslype C
Bormans G
Deroose CM
Source :
Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine [J Nucl Med] 2023 Apr; Vol. 64 (4), pp. 632-638. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Oct 20.
Publication Year :
2023

Abstract

<superscript>18</superscript> F-labeled somatostatin analogs (SSAs) could represent a valid alternative to the current gold standard, <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-labeled SSAs, for somatostatin receptor imaging in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), given their logistic advantages. Recently, <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-NOTA-octreotide ( <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC) has emerged as a promising candidate, but a thorough comparison with <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTA-SSA in large patient groups is needed. This prospective, multicenter trial aims to demonstrate noninferiority of <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC compared with <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTA-SSA PET in NET patients (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04552847). Methods: Seventy-five patients with histologically confirmed NET and routine clinical <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE ( n = 56) or <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTANOC ( n = 19) PET, performed within a 3-mo interval of the study scan (median, 7 d; range, -30 to +32 d), were included. Patients underwent a whole-body PET 2 h after intravenous injection of 4 MBq/kg of <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC. A randomized, masked consensus read was performed by 2 experienced readers to count tumor lesions. After unmasking, the detection ratio (DR) was determined for each scan, that is, the fraction of lesions detected on a scan compared with the union of lesions of both scans. The differential DR (DDR; difference in DR between <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC and <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE/NOC) per patient was calculated. Tracer uptake was evaluated by comparing SUV <subscript>max</subscript> and tumor-to-background ratios in concordant lesions. Results: In total, 4,709 different tumor lesions were detected: 3,454 with <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE/NOC and 4,278 with <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC. The mean DR with <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC was significantly higher than with <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE/NOC (91.1% vs. 75.3%; P < 10 <superscript>-5</superscript> ). The resulting mean DDR was 15.8%, with a lower margin of the 95% CI (95% CI, 9.6%-22.0%) higher than -15%, which is the prespecified boundary for noninferiority. The mean DDRs for the <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE and <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTANOC subgroups were 11.8% (95% CI, 4.3-19.3) and 27.5% (95% CI, 17.8-37.1), respectively. The mean DDR for most organs was higher than zero, except for bone lesions (mean DDR, -2.8%; 95% CI, -17.8 to 12.2). No significant differences in mean SUV <subscript>max</subscript> were observed ( P = 0.067), but mean tumor-to-background ratio was significantly higher with <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC than with <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE/NOC (31.7 ± 36.5 vs. 25.1 ± 32.7; P = 0.001). Conclusion: <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC is noninferior and even superior to <superscript>68</superscript> Ga-DOTATATE/NOC PET in NET patients. This validates <superscript>18</superscript> F-AlF-OC as an option for clinical practice somatostatin receptor PET.<br /> (© 2023 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1535-5667
Volume :
64
Issue :
4
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
36265911
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.122.264563