High Risk Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial
— PROSTAGEOfficial title:
Imaging for Prostate Cancer Metastasis Detection - Traditional Imaging (Bone Scan and CT) Versus PSMA-PET-CT, SPECT-CT and Whole-Body MRI
NCT number | NCT03537391 |
Other study ID # | T95/2018 |
Secondary ID | |
Status | Completed |
Phase | N/A |
First received | |
Last updated | |
Start date | March 1, 2018 |
Est. completion date | May 2, 2022 |
Verified date | May 2022 |
Source | Turku University Hospital |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer among men and one quarter of diagnosed PC are metastatic at the time of diagnosis. Accurate staging is paramount as the stage is the most important factor when treatment decisions are made. The stage is also the single most important prognostic factor. Currently, traditional imaging methods for detection of PC metastasis, including bone scan (BS) and contrast enhanced whole-body computer tomography (CT), are rather inaccurate. Respectively, novel imaging techniques are evolving and novel imaging modalities are emerging in PC diagnostics and staging, but their clinical relevance is unclear and lacking prospective studies comparing traditional imaging with novel imaging. This prospective single-institutional study compares the diagnostic accuracy of novel imaging modalities to traditional imaging modalities aiming to find the most appropriate staging modality in high-risk PC at the time of initial staging.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 80 |
Est. completion date | May 2, 2022 |
Est. primary completion date | September 22, 2019 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | Male |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Histologically confirmed PC without previous PC treatment - High-risk PC defined with one or more of the following criteria: Gleason =4+3, PSA =20, cT=3a - Adequate physical status defined (by treating clinician) as capability to undergo some form of active treatment for the PC and the physical status allowing the patient to undergo all study imaging modalities - Signed informed consent Exclusion Criteria: - Previous PC treatment. Short-term androgen deprivation therapy is permitted if necessary for symptomatic and/or very high-risk PC patients - Contraindications for MRI (cardiac pacemaker, intracranial clips etc.) - Claustrophobia |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Finland | Department of Urology | Turku |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Turku University Hospital | University of Turku |
Finland,
Backhaus P, Noto B, Avramovic N, Grubert LS, Huss S, Bögemann M, Stegger L, Weckesser M, Schäfers M, Rahbar K. Targeting PSMA by radioligands in non-prostate disease-current status and future perspectives. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 May;45(5):860-877. doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3922-y. Epub 2018 Jan 15. Review. — View Citation
Cardinale J, Martin R, Remde Y, Schäfer M, Hienzsch A, Hübner S, Zerges AM, Marx H, Hesse R, Weber K, Smits R, Hoepping A, Müller M, Neels OC, Kopka K. Procedures for the GMP-Compliant Production and Quality Control of [(18)F]PSMA-1007: A Next Generation Radiofluorinated Tracer for the Detection of Prostate Cancer. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2017 Sep 27;10(4). pii: E77. doi: 10.3390/ph10040077. — View Citation
Cardinale J, Schäfer M, Benešová M, Bauder-Wüst U, Leotta K, Eder M, Neels OC, Haberkorn U, Giesel FL, Kopka K. Preclinical Evaluation of (18)F-PSMA-1007, a New Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand for Prostate Cancer Imaging. J Nucl Med. 2017 Mar;58(3):425-431. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.181768. Epub 2016 Oct 27. — View Citation
Eder M, Schäfer M, Bauder-Wüst U, Hull WE, Wängler C, Mier W, Haberkorn U, Eisenhut M. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012 Apr 18;23(4):688-97. doi: 10.1021/bc200279b. Epub 2012 Mar 13. — View Citation
Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, Zuriel L, Kollender Y, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Ron I, Mishani E. Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004 Feb;45(2):272-8. — View Citation
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-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. — View Citation
Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med. 2005 Aug;46(8):1356-67. Review. — View Citation
Fendler WP, Schmidt DF, Wenter V, Thierfelder KM, Zach C, Stief C, Bartenstein P, Kirchner T, Gildehaus FJ, Gratzke C, Faber C. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT Detects the Location and Extent of Primary Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016 Nov;57(11):1720-1725. Epub 2016 Jun 3. — View Citation
Freitag MT, Kesch C, Cardinale J, Flechsig P, Floca R, Eiber M, Bonekamp D, Radtke JP, Kratochwil C, Kopka K, Hohenfellner M, Stenzinger A, Schlemmer HP, Haberkorn U, Giesel F. Simultaneous whole-body (18)F-PSMA-1007-PET/MRI with integrated high-resolution multiparametric imaging of the prostatic fossa for comprehensive oncological staging of patients with prostate cancer: a pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 Mar;45(3):340-347. doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3854-6. Epub 2017 Oct 16. — View Citation
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983 Sep;148(3):839-43. — View Citation
Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, Mason M, Matveev V, Wiegel T, Zattoni F, Mottet N; European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014 Jan;65(1):124-37. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.046. Epub 2013 Oct 6. — View Citation
Helyar V, Mohan HK, Barwick T, Livieratos L, Gnanasegaran G, Clarke SE, Fogelman I. The added value of multislice SPECT/CT in patients with equivocal bony metastasis from carcinoma of the prostate. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010 Apr;37(4):706-13. doi: 10.1007/s00259-009-1334-3. Epub 2009 Dec 17. — View Citation
Hövels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, Jager GJ, Strum S, Hoogeveen YL, Severens JL, Barentsz JO. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2008 Apr;63(4):387-95. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2007.05.022. Epub 2008 Feb 4. Review. — View Citation
Jambor I, Kuisma A, Ramadan S, Huovinen R, Sandell M, Kajander S, Kemppainen J, Kauppila E, Auren J, Merisaari H, Saunavaara J, Noponen T, Minn H, Aronen HJ, Seppänen M. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. Acta Oncol. 2016;55(1):59-67. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2015.1027411. Epub 2015 Apr 2. — View Citation
Janssen JC, Meißner S, Woythal N, Prasad V, Brenner W, Diederichs G, Hamm B, Makowski MR. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and (99m)Tc-DPD-SPECT/CT for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients: Additional value of morphologic information from low dose CT. Eur Radiol. 2018 Feb;28(2):610-619. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4994-6. Epub 2017 Aug 4. — View Citation
Kesch C, Vinsensia M, Radtke JP, Schlemmer HP, Heller M, Ellert E, Holland-Letz T, Duensing S, Grabe N, Afshar-Oromieh A, Wieczorek K, Schäfer M, Neels OC, Cardinale J, Kratochwil C, Hohenfellner M, Kopka K, Haberkorn U, Hadaschik BA, Giesel FL. Intraindividual Comparison of (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, Multiparametric MRI, and Radical Prostatectomy Specimens in Patients with Primary Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective, Proof-of-Concept Study. J Nucl Med. 2017 Nov;58(11):1805-1810. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.189233. Epub 2017 May 4. Erratum in: J Nucl Med. 2019 Apr;60(4):554. — View Citation
Lecouvet FE, El Mouedden J, Collette L, Coche E, Danse E, Jamar F, Machiels JP, Vande Berg B, Omoumi P, Tombal B. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol. 2012 Jul;62(1):68-75. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.020. Epub 2012 Feb 17. — View Citation
Lecouvet FE, Geukens D, Stainier A, Jamar F, Jamart J, d'Othée BJ, Therasse P, Vande Berg B, Tombal B. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug 1;25(22):3281-7. — View Citation
Pasoglou V, Michoux N, Peeters F, Larbi A, Tombal B, Selleslagh T, Omoumi P, Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE. Whole-body 3D T1-weighted MR imaging in patients with prostate cancer: feasibility and evaluation in screening for metastatic disease. Radiology. 2015 Apr;275(1):155-66. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14141242. Epub 2014 Dec 15. — View Citation
Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, Wetherell D, Hofman MS, Murphy DG, Bolton D, Lawrentschuk N. Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictors of Positive (68)Ga-Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016 Dec;70(6):926-937. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.021. Epub 2016 Jun 28. Review. — View Citation
Rhee H, Thomas P, Shepherd B, Gustafson S, Vela I, Russell PJ, Nelson C, Chung E, Wood G, Malone G, Wood S, Heathcote P. Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography May Improve the Diagnostic Accuracy of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Localized Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2016 Oct;196(4):1261-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.3000. Epub 2016 May 21. — View Citation
Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R, Stahl R, Tiling R, Becker CR, Reiser MF, Baur-Melnyk A. Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol. 2007 Apr;17(4):939-49. Epub 2006 Sep 2. — View Citation
Seikkula HA, Kaipia AJ, Rantanen ME, Pitkäniemi JM, Malila NK, Boström PJ. Stage-specific mortality and survival trends of prostate cancer patients in Finland before and after introduction of PSA. Acta Oncol. 2017 Jul;56(7):971-977. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1288298. Epub 2017 Feb 13. — View Citation
Silver DA, Pellicer I, Fair WR, Heston WD, Cordon-Cardo C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen expression in normal and malignant human tissues. Clin Cancer Res. 1997 Jan;3(1):81-5. — View Citation
Suh CH, Shinagare AB, Westenfield AM, Ramaiya NH, Van den Abbeele AD, Kim KW. Yield of bone scintigraphy for the detection of metastatic disease in treatment-naive prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2018 Feb;73(2):158-167. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.08.004. Epub 2017 Sep 25. Review. — View Citation
Thoeny HC, Froehlich JM, Triantafyllou M, Huesler J, Bains LJ, Vermathen P, Fleischmann A, Studer UE. Metastases in normal-sized pelvic lymph nodes: detection with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 2014 Oct;273(1):125-35. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132921. Epub 2014 Jun 2. — View Citation
Trajman A, Luiz RR. McNemar chi2 test revisited: comparing sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic examinations. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2008;68(1):77-80. doi: 10.1080/00365510701666031. — View Citation
Van den Wyngaert T, Strobel K, Kampen WU, Kuwert T, van der Bruggen W, Mohan HK, Gnanasegaran G, Delgado-Bolton R, Weber WA, Beheshti M, Langsteger W, Giammarile F, Mottaghy FM, Paycha F; EANM Bone & Joint Committee and the Oncology Committee. The EANM practice guidelines for bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Aug;43(9):1723-38. doi: 10.1007/s00259-016-3415-4. Epub 2016 Jun 4. — View Citation
van Leeuwen PJ, Emmett L, Ho B, Delprado W, Ting F, Nguyen Q, Stricker PD. Prospective evaluation of 68Gallium-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative lymph node staging in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017 Feb;119(2):209-215. doi: 10.1111/bju.13540. Epub 2016 Jun 18. — View Citation
Vanel D, Bittoun J, Tardivon A. MRI of bone metastases. Eur Radiol. 1998;8(8):1345-51. Review. — View Citation
Venkitaraman R, Cook GJ, Dearnaley DP, Parker CC, Khoo V, Eeles R, Huddart RA, Horwich A, Sohaib SA. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2009 Jun;53(3):241-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2009.02070.x. — View Citation
* Note: There are 31 references in all — Click here to view all references
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | To compare the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-PSMA-1007-PET/CT (PSMA-PET/CT) to 99mTc-HMDP planar bone scintigraphy (planar BS) in pessimistic, patient-based analysis detecting of bone metastases in the initial staging of high-risk PC patients. | Comparison of area under curve (AUC) values in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of PSMA-PET/CT to planar BS in pessimistic, patient-based analysis detecting of bone metastases.
The power calculations are made on the basis of previously published work, the SKELETA trial. To be able to detect the 0,19 difference (in AUC values) using a two-tailed test with a power of 80% at a significance level of 0.05 in a 2:1 ratio of sample sizes in negative/positive groups, 48 negative cases and 24 positive cases are required. Equivocal findings of the imaging modalities will be classified either as suggestive for metastases (pessimistic analysis) or suggestive for non-metastatic origin (optimistic analysis). AUC values will be calculated using the trapezoid rule and compared using a method described by Hanley and McNeil, two-sided p-values will be calculated. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Sensitivity of each imaging modality will be measured in initial staging of nodal, soft tissue and bone metastasis | Sensitivity of PSMA-PET/CT, wbMRI, SPECT/CT, planar BS and wbCE-CT will be determined on patient-, regional- and lesion-level separately in detecting of nodal (regional lymph node/s), soft tissue (excluding regional nodal metastasis) and bone metastasis.
The outcome measure unit is a percentage. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Specificity of each imaging modality will be measured in initial staging of nodal, soft tissue and bone metastasis | Specificity of PSMA-PET/CT, wbMRI, SPECT/CT, planar BS and wbCE-CT will be determined on patient-, regional- and lesion-level separately in detecting of nodal (regional lymph node/s), soft tissue (excluding regional nodal metastasis) and bone metastasis.
The outcome measure unit is a percentage. |
1 year | |
Secondary | Diagnostic accuracy each imaging modality will be measured in initial staging of nodal, soft tissue and bone metastasis | Diagnostic accuracy of PSMA-PET/CT, wbMRI, SPECT/CT, planar BS and wbCE-CT will be determined on patient-, regional- and lesion-level separately in detecting of nodal (regional lymph node/s), soft tissue (excluding regional nodal metastasis) and bone metastasis.
The outcome measure unit is a percentage. |
1 year | |
Secondary | The effect of staging on clinical treatment-decisions | The effect of staging on clinical treatment-decisions is based on clinical judgement done retrospectively by multi-disciplinary team consensus. | 1 year | |
Secondary | AUC values from receiver operating characteristic curve of each imaging modality will be measured in initial staging of nodal, soft tissue and bone metastasis | AUC values of PSMA-PET/CT, wbMRI, SPECT/CT, planar BS and wbCE-CT will be determined on patient-, regional- and lesion-level separately in detecting of nodal (regional lymph node/s), soft tissue (excluding regional nodal metastasis) and bone metastasis.
The outcome measure is numeric unit 0-1. |
1 year |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Active, not recruiting |
NCT04236752 -
Stereotactic Pelvic Brachytherapy With HDR Boost for Dose Escalation in High Tier Intermediate and High Risk Prostate ca
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02268175 -
Enzalutamide/Leuprolide +/- Abiraterone/Pred in Prostate
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03340272 -
PROspective Multicenter Observational Study on Elective Pelvic Nodes Irradiation.
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT05406999 -
Neoadjuvant Intense Endocrine Therapy for High Risk and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer
|
Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT02107287 -
Hypofractionated Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Plus Hormonal Therapy in Patients With High Risk Prostate Cancer
|
N/A | |
Terminated |
NCT01695473 -
Neoadjuvant BKM120 in High-risk Prostate Cancer
|
Phase 2 |