4.4 Article

Initial Evaluation of [F-18]DCFPyL for Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA)-Targeted PET Imaging of Prostate Cancer

期刊

MOLECULAR IMAGING AND BIOLOGY
卷 17, 期 4, 页码 565-574

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11307-015-0850-8

关键词

PSMA; PET; Prostate cancer; Molecular imaging; Fluorine-18

资金

  1. Prostate Cancer Foundation-Young Investigator Award
  2. Patrick C. Walsh Prostate Cancer Research Fund [EB006351, CA134675, CA184228, CA103175, CA183031]
  3. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [P50CA103175, R01CA134675, U01CA183031, R01CA116477, R01CA184228, P30CA006973] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL CENTER FOR ADVANCING TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES [UL1TR001079] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [T32EB006351] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a recognized target for imaging prostate cancer. Here we present initial safety, biodistribution, and radiation dosimetry results with [F-18]DCFPyL, a second-generation fluorine-18-labeled small-molecule PSMA inhibitor, in patients with prostate cancer. Biodistribution was evaluated using sequential positron-emission tomography (PET) scans in nine patients with prostate cancer. Time-activity curves from the most avid tumor foci were determined. The radiation dose to selected organs was estimated using OLINDA/EXM. No major radiotracer-specific adverse events were observed. Physiologic accumulation was observed in known sites of PSMA expression. Accumulation in putative sites of prostate cancer was observed (SUVmax up to > 100, and tumor-to-blood ratios up to > 50). The effective radiation dose from [F-18]DCFPyL was 0.0139 mGy/MBq or 5 mGy (0.5 rem) from an injected dose of 370 MBq (10 mCi). [F-18]DCFPyL is safe with biodistribution as expected, and its accumulation is high in presumed primary and metastatic foci. The radiation dose from [F-18]DCFPyL is similar to that from other PET radiotracers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据