PSMA PET/CT in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: why and when?

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is expressed in most primitive and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), and PSMA inhibitors conjugated with the radionuclides Gallium 68 (68Ga) and fluoride 18 (18F) have been evaluated to detect PCa; moreover, tumour uptake, which represents PSMA expression, is highly correlated with the aggressiveness of the primary prostatic tumour. PSMA positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) demonstrated to be sensitive for the detection of primary prostatic lesions, regional lymphadenopathy and clinical metastases in case of biochemical recurrence. In this respect, PSMA PET/CT has been evaluated in men enrolled in clinical trials candidate to initial or repeat prostate biopsy especially in the presence of clinical high risk for PCa, Active Surveillance (AS) and/or in case of negative histology of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS score) 4-5 targeted biopsy. Although many experimental studies reported a superimposable detection rate for PCa of PSMA PET/CT vs. mpMRI targeted biopsy, still today, the use of PSMA PET/CT is experimental and had some limitations: cost, availability, patient characteristics, local expertise and false negative rate. Although prospective and randomized studies are awaited, including a greater number of patients, PSMA PET/CT evaluation could be proposed in the presence of claustrophobia, cardiac pacemaker and severe obesity especially in men at high risk for PCa.

Pepe P, Pepe L, Cosentino S, et al. Detection rate of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT vs. mpMRI targeted biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer. Anticancer Research 2022; 42:3011-3015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15785

Sheikhbahaei S, Afshar-Oromieh A, Eiber M, et al. Pearls and pitfalls in clinical interpretation of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;44: 2117-2136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3780-7

Pepe P, Pepe L, Tamburo M, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and prostate cancer diagnosis: which SUVmax value? In Vivo 2023;37:1318-1322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.13211

Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specificmembrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: Asystematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2020; 77:403-417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049

Privé BM, Israël B, Schilham MGM, et al. Evaluating F-18-PSMA-1007-PET in primary prostate cancer and comparing it to multi-parametric MRI and histopathology. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2021; 24:423-430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-00292-2

Uprimny C, Kroiss AS, Decristoforo C, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/ CT in primary staging of prostate cancer: PSA and Gleason score predict the intensity of tracer accumulation in the primary tumour. Eur J Nucl Mol Imaging 2017; 44:941-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3631-6

Emmett L, Buteau J, Papa N, et al. The additive diagnostic value of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging triage in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PRIMARY): a prospective multicentre study. Eur Urol 2021; 80:682-689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.002

Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, et al. Simultaneous 68GaPSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2016; 70:829-836. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053

Gondoputro W, Doan P, Katelaris A, et al. 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT in addition to mpMRI in men undergoing biopsy during active surveillance for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer: study protocol for a prospective cross-sectional study. Transl Androl Urol 2023;12:1598-1606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-22-708

Pepe P, Pennisi M. Should 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT replace CT and bone scan in clinical staging of high-risk prostate cancer? Anticancer Research 2022; 42:1495-1498. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15621

Carvalho J, Nunes P, Da Silva ET, et al. [68Ga] Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT: Local preliminary experience in prostate cancer biochemical recurrence patients. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2021; 93:21-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.1.21

Pepe P, Fandella A, Barbera M, et al. Advances in radiology and pathology of prostate cancer: a review for the pathologist. Pathologica 2024; 116:1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32074/1591-951X-925

Panebianco V, Barchetti G, Simone G, et al. Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what’s next? Eur Urol 2018; 74:48-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.03.007

Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo GD, et al. Is it time to perform only MRI targeted biopsy? Our experience in 1032 men submitted to prostate biopsy. J Urol 2018; 200:774-778. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.04.061

Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANMESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2024 Update. Part I: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 2024; 86:148-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.027

Kawada T, Yanagisawa T, Rajwa P, et al. Diagnostic performance of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-targeted biopsy for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2022; 5:390-400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2022.04.006

Pepe P, Pennisi M. Targeted biopsy in men high risk for prostate cancer: 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus mpMRI. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:639-642. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2023.06.007

Demirci E, Kabasakal L, Sahin OE, et al. Can SUVmax values of Ga-68-PSMA PET/CT scan predict the clinically significant prostate cancer? Nucl Med Commun 2019; 40:86-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000942

Heetman JG, Paulino Pereira LJ, et al. The additional value of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT SUVmax in predicting ISUP GG ≥ 2 and ISUP GG ≥ 3 prostate cancer in biopsy. Prostate 2024; 84:1025-1032. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24716

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. Grading Committee: The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2016; 40:244-252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530

Kalapara AA, Nzenza T, Pan HYC, et al. Detection and localization of primary prostate cancer using 68gallium prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and radical prostatectomy specimen pathology. BJU Int 2020; 126:83-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14858

Exterkate L, Hermsen R, Küsters-Vandevelde HVN, et al. Head-to-head comparison of 18F-PSMA-1007 positron emission tomography/computed tomography and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with whole-mount histopathology as reference in localisation and staging of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 2023; 6:574-581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2023.04.006

Ferraro DA, Becker AS, Kranzbühler B, et al. Diagnostic performance of Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI-guided biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer: a prospective single-center study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48:3315-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05261-y

Wong LM, Sutherland T, Perry E, et al. Fluorine-18-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose and localise prostate cancer. A prospective single-arm paired comparison (PEDAL). Eur Urol Oncol. 2024; 7:1015-1023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.01.002

An C, Qiu X, Liu B, et al. A PSMA PET/CT-based risk model for prediction of concordance between targeted biopsy and combined biopsy in detecting prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2024; 42:285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-04947-w

Cytawa W, Kircher S, Kübler H, et al. Diverse PSMA expression in primary prostate cancer: reason for negative 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT scans? Immunohistochemical validation in 40 surgical specimens. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49:3938-3949. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05831-8

Pepe P, Pepe L, Tamburo M, et al. Targeted prostate biopsy: 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT vs. mpMRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2022; 94:274-277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2022.3.274

Pepe P, Pennisi M. Morbidity following transperineal prostate biopsy: our experience in 8,500 men. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2022;29: 94:155-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2022.2.155

Pepe P, Dibenedetto G, Pennisi M, et al. Detection rate of anterior prostate cancer in 226 patients submitted to initial and repeat transperineal biopsy. Urol Int 2014; 93:189-192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000358494

Bodar YJL, Boevé LMS, van Leeuwen PJ, et al. Using prostate specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography to guide prostate biopsies and stage men at high-risk of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2023; 132:705-712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.16167

Carlsson S, Benfante N, Alvim R, et al. Long-term outcomes of active surveillance for prostate cancer: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center experience. J Urol 2020; 203:1122-1127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000713

Briganti A, Fossati N, Catto JWF, et al. Active Surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: The European Association of Urology position in 2018. Eur Urol 2018; 74:357-368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.06.008

Pepe P, Cimino S, Garufi A, et al. Confirmatory biopsy of men under active surveillance: extended versus saturation versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy. Scand J Urol 2017; 51:260-263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2017.1313310

Pepe P, Pepe L, Pennisi M. Which prostate biopsy in men enrolled in active surveillance? Experience in 110 men submitted to scheduled three-years transperineal saturation biopsy combined with fusion targeted cores. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021; 19:305-308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2021.01.004

Heetman JG, Lavalaye J, Polm PD, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography in active surveillance for prostate cancer trial (PASPoRT). Eur Urol Oncol. 2024;7:204-210.

Raveenthiran S, Yaxley WJ, Franklin T, et al. Findings in 1,123 men with preoperative 68 Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging compared to totally embedded radical prostatectomy histopathology: implications for the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. J Urol 2022;207:573-580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002293

Xue AL, Kalapara AA, Ballok ZE, et al. 68Ga-Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography maximum standardized uptake value as a predictor of Gleason pattern 4 and pathological upgrading in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2022; 207:341-349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002254

Pepe P, Roscigno M, Pepe L, et al. Could 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT evaluation reduce the number of scheduled prostate biopsies in men enrolled in active surveillance protocols? J Clin Med. 2022;11:3473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11123473

Pepe P, Pepe L, Tamburo M, et al. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT evaluation in men enrolled in prostate cancer active surveillance. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2023; 95:11322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2023.11322

Heetman JG, Lavalaye J, Polm PD, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography in active surveillance for prostate cancer trial (PASPoRT). Eur Urol Oncol 2023;7:S2588-9311(23)00087-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2023.05.004

Akcay K, Kibar A, Sahin OE, et al. Prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer by [68 Ga] Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a potential tool for selecting patients for active surveillance. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2024; 51:1467-1475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06556-y

Dondi F, Antonelli A, Suardi N, et al. The role of PSMA PET imaging in the classification of the risk of prostate cancer patients: a systematic review on the insights to guide an active surveillance approach. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16061122

Westphalen AC, Fazel F, Nguyen H, et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions. Int Braz J Urol 2019; 45:713-723. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0768

Otti VC, Miller C, Powell RJ, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2019; 123:82-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14420

Pepe P, Pennisi M. Negative biopsy histology in men with PIRADS Score 5 in daily clinical practice: incidence of granulomatous prostatitis. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2020; 18:e684-e687. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2020.04.001

Pepe P, Aragona F. PCA3 score vs PSA free/total accuracy in prostate cancer diagnosis at repeat saturation biopsy. Anticancer Res 2011; 31:4445-9.

Pepe P, Aragona F. PCA3 score vs PSA free/total accuracy in prostate cancer diagnosis at repeat saturation biopsy. Anticancer Res. 2011; 31:4445-4449.

Salemi M, Pettinato A, Fraggetta F, et al. Expression of miR-132 and miR-212 in prostate cancer and metastatic lymph node: Case report and revision of the literature. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020;92:209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.3.209

Li JL, Phillips D, Towfighi S, et al. Second-opinion reads in prostate MRI: added value of subspecialty interpretation and review at multidisciplinary rounds. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:827-837. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03377-1

Wong LM, Koschel S, Whish-Wilson T, et al. Investigating PSMA-PET/CT to resolve prostate MRI PIRADS 4-5 and negative biopsy discordance. World J Urol 2023; 463-469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04243-5

Pepe P, Pepe L, Pennisi M. Negative biopsy histology in men with PI-RADS score 5: is it useful PSMA PET/CT evaluation? Arch Ital Urol Androl 2024; 96:12358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12358

Li Y, Li J, Yang J, Xiao L, et al. Using a novel PSMA-PET and PSA-based model to enhance the diagnostic accuracy for clinically significant prostate cancer and avoid unnecessary biopsy in men with PI-RADS ≤ 3 MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2025; 52:913-924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06949-7

Meng X, Ma W, Zhang J, et al. PI-RADS-based segmented threshold of PSMA-PET SUVmax is better than traditional fixed threshold for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer especially for PI-RADS 3 lesions. Mol Imaging Biol. 2023; 25:887-896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-023-01841-6

Privé BM, Israël B, Janssen MJR, et al. Multiparametric MRI and 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Radiology. 2024; 311:e231879. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.231879

Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al. proPSMA study PSMA PET/CT and ductal PCa Group Collaborators: prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet 2020; 395:1208-1216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7

Bernardino R, Sayyid RK, Lajkosz K, et al. Intraductal prostate cancer affinity for lymphatic-predominant metastases through 18F-DCFPyL-prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography/CT scans in pretreatment prostate cancer patients. J Urol 2024; 211:586-593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003850

Vetrone L, Mei R, Bianchi L, et al. Histology and PSMA expression on immunohistochemistry in high-risk prostate cancer patients: comparison with 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT features in primary staging. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:1716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15061716

Zhao Q, Dong A, Bai Y, Zuo C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen uptake heterogeneity in mixed ductal-acinar

adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Clin Nucl Med 2023; 48:750-752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004742

Pahouja G, Patel HD, Desai S, et al. The rising incidence of ductal adenocarcinoma and intraductal carcinoma of the prostate: Diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, MRI-visibility, and outcomes. Urol Oncol 2023; 41:48.e11-48.e18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.09.025

Qiu S, Dong A, Zhu Y, Zuo C. 68 Ga-PSMA-11 and 18 F-FDG PET/CT in a case of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Clin Nucl Med 2022; 47:836-838. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004230

Pepe P, Fraggetta F, Tornabene F, et al. Solitary lung metastasis after radical prostatectomy in presence of undetectable PSA. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2012;84:208-10.

Pepe P, Pepe L, Curduman M, et al. Ductal prostate cancer staging: Role of PSMA PET/CT. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2024;96:12132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12132

Checcucci E, Bauckneht M, Cisero E, et al. PSMA PET-targeted biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis: initial experience from a multicenter cohort. Urology 2025; 196:178-185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2024.10.026