Head-to-head comparison of [99mTc]Tc-MDP and [99mTc]Tc-PSMA whole-body SPECT/CT in prostate cancer patients

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Rajaee Heart Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Rasoul Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hasheminezhad Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Radiation Oncology, Hasheminezhad Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 Department of Urology, Hasheminezhad Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

6 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Kosar Hospital, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran

Abstract

Intoduction: Due to high expenses and lack of wide availability of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT scan, we aimed to evaluate [99mTc]Tc-MDP and [99mTc]Tc-PSMA scan findings in a cluster of prostate cancer patients.
Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2021 to March 2022 at Shahid Hashemi Nejad hospital in Tehran, Iran. In this study, prostate cancer patients with intermediate to high-risk or patients with PSA rise during follow-up were selected for undergoing both [99mTc]Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and [99mTc]Tc-PSMA scan. The scans were performed with a maximum 2-week interval. The images were evaluated for presence, number and locations of abnormal lesions. CT findings were used as an anatomical comparator; however, CT was not considered a true reference standard.
Results: 20 patients were evaluated. 63 bone lesions on CT scan, 69 lesions on [99mTc]Tc-MDP bone scan, 23 lesions on [99mTc]Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT and 16 lesions on [99mTc]Tc-PSMA planar images, were visualized. 56.3%, 31.1% and 31.1% of patients had positive conventional bone scan, [99mTc]Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT and planar [99mTc]Tc-PSMA images. Mean number of lesions on these modalities were 4.31±6.85, 1.43±3.75 and 1.00±2.30, respectively. Sensitivity rates of these three modalities were 100%, 55.6% and 55.6% while specificity was 100% for all of these modalities. Mean number of bone lesions on [99mTc]Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and [99mTc]Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT showed significant difference (p=0.027).
Conclusion: In this cohort, [99mTc]Tc-MDP whole-body SPECT/CT scintigraphy identified a greater number of skeletal lesions than [99mTc]Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT. however, because a composite reference standard was unavailable, these findings should be interpreted as differences in lesion detection rather than definitive evidence of superior diagnostic performance. Larger prospective multicenter studies are warranted.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Zhang, Y., Lin, Z., Li, T. et al. Head-to-head comparison of [99mTc]Tc-PSMA and [99mTc]Tc-MDP SPECT/CT in diagnosing prostate cancer bone metastasis: a prospective, comparative imaging trial. Sci Rep 12, 15993 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-20280-x
  2. Moreira, D. M. et al. Predicting time from metastasis to overall survival in castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from search. Clin. Genitourin. Cancer 15(1), 60-66.e2 (2017).
  3. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I. The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: [99mTc]Tc-MDP Planar bone scintigraphy, single- and multi-field-of-view SPECT, 18F-fluoride PET, and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006 Feb;47(2):287-97. PMID: 16455635.
  4. Zhao G, Ji B. Head-To-Head Comparison of [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and [99mTc]Tc-MDP Bone Scintigraphy for the Detection of Bone Metastases in Patients With Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2022 Sep;219(3):386-395. doi: 10.2214/AJR.21.27323. Epub 2022 Apr 20. Erratum in: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2022 Sep;219(3):529. doi: 10.2214/AJR.22.28240. PMID: 35441529.
  5. Wang Y, Qiu Y, Yan X. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET versus [99mTc]Tc-MDP bone scan for diagnosing bone metastasis in prostate cancer: a head-to-head comparative meta-analysis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Sep 25;11:1451565. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1451565. PMID: 39386742; PMCID: PMC11461218.
  6. Albalooshi B, Bagheri F, Miyanath S, et al. Direct comparison of (99m)Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT and (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol. 2020;8:1-7.
  7. Kabunda J, Gabela L, Kalinda C, et al. Comparing [99mTc]Tc-PSMA to [99mTc]Tc-MDP in prostate cancer staging of the skeletal system. Clin Nucl Med. 2021;46:562-568.
  8. Orunmuyi AT, Oladeji AA, Azodoh EU, Omisanjo OA, Olapade-Olaopa EO. Planar 99m Tc-PSMA Imaging of Prostate Cancer in a Low-Resource Setting: A Series Report. World J Nucl Med. 2022 Jun 28;21(2):142-147. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1750336. PMID: 35865161; PMCID: PMC9296248.
  9. Rathke H, Afshar-Oromieh A, Giesel FL, Kremer C, Flechsig P, Haufe S, Mier W, Holland-Letz T, De Bucourt M, Armor T, Babich JW, Haberkorn U, Kratochwil C. Intraindividual Comparison of 99mTc-Methylene Diphosphonate and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand 99mTc-MIP-1427 in Patients with Osseous Metastasized Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2018 Sep;59(9):1373-1379. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.200220. Epub 2018 Jan 25. PMID: 29371410.
  10. Farkas I, Sipka G, Bakos A, Maráz A, Bajory Z, Mikó Z, Czékus T, Urbán S, Varga L, Pávics L, Besenyi Z. Diagnostic value of [99mTc]Tc-PSMA-I&S-SPECT/CT for the primary staging and restaging of prostate cancer. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2024 Jan 18;16:17588359231221342. doi: 10.1177/17588359231221342. PMID: 38249326; PMCID: PMC10798073.
  11. Duncan I, Ingold N, Martinez-Marroquin E, Paterson C. An Australian experience using Tc-PSMA SPECT/CT in the primary diagnosis of prostate cancer and for staging at biochemical recurrence after local therapy. The Prostate. 2023; 83: 970-979.
  12. Sergieva S, Mangaldgiev R, Dimcheva M, Nedev K, Zahariev Z, Robev B. SPECT/CT Imaging with [99mTc]PSMA-T4 in patients with Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur. 2021;24(2):70-81. doi: 10.5603/NMR.2021.0018. PMID: 34382671.