Prognostic Value of End-of-Treatment PSMA PET/CT in Patients Treated with 177Lu-PSMA Radioligand Therapy: A Retrospective, Single-Center Analysis.

Our objective was to evaluate the prognostic value of end-of-treatment prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT (PSMA-PET) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with ¹⁷⁷Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy (PSMA-RLT). Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study. mCRPC patients who underwent PSMA-RLT with available baseline PSMA-PET (bPET) and end-of-treatment PSMA-PET (ePET) within 6 mo of the last PSMA-RLT cycle were eligible. Overall survival (OS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression status at the time of ePET (by Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria) were collected. PSMA-PET tumor segmentation was performed to obtain whole-body PSMA tumor volume (PSMA-VOL) and define progressive (≥20% increase) versus nonprogressive disease. Pairs of bPET and ePET were interpreted for appearance of new lesions. Response Evaluation Criteria in PSMA-PET/CT (RECIP) 1.0 were also applied to define progressive versus nonprogressive disease. The associations between changes in PSMA-VOL, new lesions, RECIP 1.0, and PSA progression status at the time of ePET with OS were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Twenty mCRPC patients were included. The median number of treatment cycles was 3.5 (interquartile range [IQR], 2-4). The median time between bPET and cycle 1 of PSMA-RLT was 1.0 mo (IQR, 0.7-1.8 mo). The median time between the last cycle of PSMA-RLT and ePET was 1.9 mo (IQR, 1.2-3.5 mo). Twelve of 20 patients (60%) had died at the last follow-up. The median follow-up time from ePET for survivors was 31.2 mo (IQR, 6.8-40.7 mo). The median OS from ePET was 11.4 mo (IQR, 6.8-30.7 mo). Patients with new lesions on ePET had shorter OS than those without new lesions (median OS, 10.7 mo [95% CI, 9.2-12.2] vs. not reached; P = 0.002). Patients with progressive PSMA-VOL had shorter OS than those with nonprogressive PSMA-VOL (median OS, 10.7 mo [95% CI: 9.7-11.7 mo] vs. not reached; P = 0.007). Patients with progressive RECIP had shorter OS than those with nonprogressive RECIP (median OS, 10.7 mo [95% CI, 9.7-11.7 mo] vs. not reached; P = 0.007). PSA progression at the time of ePET was associated with shorter OS (median, 10.9 mo [95% CI, 9.4-12.4 mo] vs. not reached; P = 0.028). Conclusion: In this retrospective study of 20 mCRPC patients treated with PSMA-RLT, progression on ePET by the appearance of new lesions, changes in PSMA-VOL, and RECIP 1.0 was prognostic for OS. Validation in larger, prospective multicentric clinical trials is warranted.