Anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and (111)In-capromab pendetide single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography for recurrent prostate carcinoma: results of a prospective clinical trial.

Purpose: We prospectively evaluated the amino acid analogue positron emission tomography radiotracer anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC compared to ProstaScint® ((111)In-capromab pendetide) single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography to detect recurrent prostate carcinoma.

Materials And Methods: A total of 93 patients met study inclusion criteria who underwent anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography plus (111)In-capromab pendetide single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography for suspected recurrent prostate carcinoma within 90 days. Reference standards were applied by a multidisciplinary board. We calculated diagnostic performance for detecting disease.

Results: In the 91 of 93 patients with sufficient data for a consensus on the presence or absence of prostate/bed disease anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC had 90.2% sensitivity, 40.0% specificity, 73.6% accuracy, 75.3% positive predictive value and 66.7% negative predictive value compared to (111)In-capromab pendetide with 67.2%, 56.7%, 63.7%, 75.9% and 45.9%, respectively. In the 70 of 93 patients with a consensus on the presence or absence of extraprostatic disease anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC had 55.0% sensitivity, 96.7% specificity, 72.9% accuracy, 95.7% positive predictive value and 61.7% negative predictive value compared to (111)In-capromab pendetide with 10.0%, 86.7%, 42.9%, 50.0% and 41.9%, respectively. Of 77 index lesions used to prove positivity histological proof was obtained in 74 (96.1%). Anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC identified 14 more positive prostate bed recurrences (55 vs 41) and 18 more patients with extraprostatic involvement (22 vs 4). Anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography correctly up-staged 18 of 70 cases (25.7%) in which there was a consensus on the presence or absence of extraprostatic involvement.

Conclusions: Better diagnostic performance was noted for anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography than for (111)In-capromab pendetide single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography for prostate carcinoma recurrence. The former method detected significantly more prostatic and extraprostatic disease.