Open Access

Kerstin Michalski, Aleksander Kosmala, Rudolf A. Werner, Sebastian E. Serfling, Anna K. Seitz, Constantin Lapa, Andreas K. Buck, Philipp E. Hartrampf

• Background Two randomized clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligand therapy (PSMA RLT) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). While the VISION trial used criteria within PSMA PET/CT for inclusion, the TheraP trial used dual tracer imaging including FDG PET/CT. Therefore, we investigated whether the application of the VISION criteria leads to a benefit in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) for men with mCRPC after PSMA RLT. Methods Thirty-five men with mCRPC who had received PSMA RLT as a last-line option and who had undergone pretherapeutic imaging with FDG and [68Ga]Ga-PSMA I&T or [18F]PSMA-1007 were studied. Therapeutic eligibility was retrospectively evaluated using the VISION and TheraP study criteria. Results 26 of 35 (74%) treated patients fulfilled the VISION criteria (= VISION+) and only 17 of 35 (49%) fulfilled the TheraP criteria (= TheraP+). Significantly reduced OS andBackground Two randomized clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligand therapy (PSMA RLT) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). While the VISION trial used criteria within PSMA PET/CT for inclusion, the TheraP trial used dual tracer imaging including FDG PET/CT. Therefore, we investigated whether the application of the VISION criteria leads to a benefit in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) for men with mCRPC after PSMA RLT. Methods Thirty-five men with mCRPC who had received PSMA RLT as a last-line option and who had undergone pretherapeutic imaging with FDG and [68Ga]Ga-PSMA I&T or [18F]PSMA-1007 were studied. Therapeutic eligibility was retrospectively evaluated using the VISION and TheraP study criteria. Results 26 of 35 (74%) treated patients fulfilled the VISION criteria (= VISION+) and only 17 of 35 (49%) fulfilled the TheraP criteria (= TheraP+). Significantly reduced OS and PFS after PSMA RLT was observed in patients rated VISION− compared to VISION+ (OS: VISION−: 3 vs. VISION+: 12 months, hazard ratio (HR) 3.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0–9.1, p < 0.01; PFS: VISION−: 1 vs. VISION+: 5 months, HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.0–7.8, p < 0.01). For patients rated TheraP−, no significant difference in OS but in PFS was observed compared to TheraP+ patients (OS: TheraP−: 5.5 vs. TheraP+: 11 months, HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.8–3.3, p = 0.2; PFS: TheraP−: 1 vs. TheraP+: 6 months, HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0–4.5, p < 0.01). Conclusion Retrospective application of the inclusion criteria of the VISION study leads to a benefit in OS and PFS after PSMA RL, whereas TheraP criteria appear to be too strict in patients with end-stage prostate cancer. Thus, performing PSMA PET/CT including a contrast-enhanced CT as proposed in the VISION trial might be sufficient for treatment eligibility of end-stage prostate cancer patients.…