Biomarkers to personalize treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617 in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Abstract

Radioligand therapy with Lutetium-177 (177Lu)-Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has shown to prolong survival in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). One of the major challenges for clinicians in the future is to select those patients who would benefit most from this therapy to position it in the treatment landscape of mCRPC. This, in turn, will lead to the delivery of personalized therapies. In this narrative review article we summarize recent studies investigating both predictive and prognostic clinical, imaging-based, and molecular biomarkers to predict treatment response to 177Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy with the aim of identifying men who should be considered for this approach. Of note, the evidence on the role of biomarkers currently relies on small retrospective trials and their validation in larger prospective cohorts is necessary before these results can be translated in the clinical practice.

Keywords

177Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy biomarkers mCRPC

Introduction

Metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most prevalent malignancies in the world and is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality in men.¹ While most cases are diagnosed in localized stage and are managed expectantly or cured by local therapy such as surgery or radiotherapy, a considerable number of patients with intermediate or high-risk localized, locally advanced or metastatic cancer die from the disease itself each year.¹ Although therapeutic advances have been introduced in the field of metastatic PC in the past years, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the leading therapeutic backbone for metastatic PC.^2,3 However, patients managed with ADT would ineluctably develop a castration resistant state during follow-up. As such, additional therapies are needed. The exact mechanisms driving progression from androgen-dependent PC to castration resistance prostate cancer (CRPC) are not completely understood and might involve androgen receptor signaling despite depletion of circulating androgens and androgen receptor blockade is thought to be central to the development of CRPC.^4,5

Over the past years, the treatment landscape of metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) has substantially improved due to the availability of different agents, including taxane-based chemotherapeutics (e.g. docetaxel, cabazitaxel), androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI) (e.g. abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, apalutamide), radium-223 in the third line therapy setting, poly-ADP-Ribose-Polymerase (PARP) inhibition in patients with DNA damage repair (DDR) alterations (BRCA1, 2) or immune based strategies like the autologous vaccine sipuleucel T and the PD-1-inhibitor pembrolizumab which have been approved in selected patients in the Unites States only.⁶

However, fast tumor progression, cross-resistance, the use of these substances in earlier (hormone-sensitive) stage of the disease and patient related factors (e.g. performance status, co-morbidities) should be taken into account when assessing which is the optimal treatment sequencing in the setting of mCRPC.

PSMA in diagnostic and therapy

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), also known as glutamate carboxypeptidase II or folate hydrolase I, is a prostate membrane specific bound protein on the epithelial cells of the prostate.⁷ PSMA is also over-expressed physiologically in other organs including kidney, salivary gland, lacrimal gland and duodenal mucosa.⁸ The exact role of PSMA over-expression on PC cells is not completely understood. Preclinical evidence shows that PC cells demonstrate increased glutamine utilization and therefore may in part depend on PSMA for nucleotide biosynthesis and metabolism, which in turn influences cell proliferation and invasiveness.⁹

Basically, PSMA-targeting tracers can be labeled with different radionuclides for diagnostic purposes, among them positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of PC with either Gallium-68 or Flourine-18 are the most common ones.¹⁰ Due to its superiority to conventional imaging (bone scan/computer-tomography) or other PET radiopharmaceuticals, PSMA PET imaging of biochemically recurrent PC (BCR) is currently implemented in routine management in many countries and recommended by several guidelines including the European Association of Urology (EAU) or the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines^11–13.

Beside its diagnostic role, in the last decade, PSMA radioligand therapy (RLT) gained prominence in treating mCRPC in late stages in the last decade. In particular, the Lutetium-177 conjugated small molecule peptide, 177Lu-PSMA-617 is the most used PSMA-targeted radionuclide therapy in clinical development (Figure 1). 177Lu has favorable physical characteristics with a short-range medium-energy β particle for crossfire to surrounding tumor cells, relatively long half-life of 6.7 days and low energy γ emission. Promising antitumor activity and modest toxicity of 177Lu-PSMA RLT were reported in multiple retrospective studies in the past years.

Figure 1.

Mechanism of action of lutetium-177-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen: PSMA-617 targeting ligand radiolabeled with [177Lu] binds to PSMA molecule on the prostate cancer cell membrane >177Lu-atom releases ß and γ particles > DNA damage > cell death.

Recently, the randomized multicenter phase II trial TheraP evaluated 200 mCRPC patients for whom cabazitaxel was considered the next appropriate standard treatment and demonstrated that 177Lu-PSMA-617 led to a higher prostate specific antigen (PSA) response (⩾50%) (66% vs 37%) compared to chemotherapy. In addition, 177Lu-PSMA-617 delayed radiographic and PSA progression compared to cabazitaxel (hazard ratio (HR) 0.63). At 12 months (mo), 19% had not progressed with 177Lu-PSMA-617 compared to 3% with cabazitaxel, although the median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar at 5.1 months, with a greater benefit for 177Lu-PSMA-617 emerging after 6 months. The objective response rate (ORR) defined by RECIST 1.1 was higher with 177Lu-PSMA-617 (49% vs 24%).¹⁴ Of note, grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in 33% in the 177Lu-PSMA-617 group versus 53% in the cabazitaxel group suggesting that this novel therapy option is superior to chemotherapy in terms of side effects.

Furthermore, the multicenter randomized phase III VISION trial included 831 patients progressed on at least one ARSI and one or two taxane to receive 177Lu-PSMA-617 plus standard-of-care (SOC) vs SOC alone. Both primary endpoints overall survival (OS) (median 11.3 to 15.3 mo, HR: 0.62) and radiologic progression-free survival (fPFS) (median: 3.4 to 8.7 mo, HR: 0.4) were reached in the 177Lu-PSMA-617 arm.¹⁵

In conclusion, two randomized trials evaluated the role of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the setting of mCRPC and provide complementary evidence: the VISION study demonstrated a survival benefit in men who have exhausted current therapeutic options while TheraP trial places PSMA theranostics once step earlier by comparing it to cabazitaxel showing greater efficacy, lower toxicity and better patient reported outcomes.

Currently, 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy is investigated even in earlier stage of disease (locally advanced, primary metastatic), prior to chemotherapy and/or ARSI as well as in combination with PARP inhibitors (olaparib), hormonal therapy (enzalutamide) or immunotherapy (pembrolizumab) (reviewed in Sandhu et al.¹⁶).

Despite promising findings, better understanding of optimal patient selection for PSMA based RLT, sequencing of the available therapies and therapeutic resistance remain key ongoing challenges. Therefore, there is an unmet need for both predictive and prognostic biomarkers to use RLT at the optimal time point for the optimal patient in order to pursue a personalized treatment concept.

This review article provides an overview of the current literature on image based, blood based and patient /tumor characteristics-based biomarkers and discuss their impact in daily practice. In addition, we report first findings from preclinical or early phase clinical studies.

Clinical biomarkers

Ferdinandus et al.¹⁷ analyzed 40 mCRPC patients with distant metastases and progressive disease who underwent 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy and found that younger age (cutoff 65 years, p < 0.001) had a negative impact on any PSA decline during therapy. In line with this finding, patients’ age > 77 years has been demonstrated as significant predictor for a PSA decrease > 20% during 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy in another cohort.¹⁸

Several studies revealed that asymptomatic patients have better OS rates compared to symptomatic patients when treated with 177Lu-PSMA-617 (reviewed in von Eyben et al.¹⁹). For example, the regular use of pain medication (p = 0.0018) as well as high Gleason Score (p = 0.01) were related to a PSA decline of more than 50% during therapy.¹⁷ Patients with pain and high Gleason score may comprise a selection of patients who have a poor prognosis and may respond poorly to any therapy. Ahmadazedehfar et al.²⁰ also reported that both PSA decline and OS were worse in patients with regular need for analgesics. In addition, poor performance status was reported to be associated with lower therapy response.^21,22

Generally, the presence of visceral metastatic load is associated with poor OS in mCRPC. Concerning its prognostic impact during RLT, Heck and colleagues reported in 100 patients treated by 177Lu-PSMA-617 that median PFS was 3.1 mo in patients with visceral metastasis diagnosed by Gallium-PSMA PET CT versus 5.9 mo in those without visceral metastasis (HR: 1.7, p = 0.02).²³ This finding is in line with another German trial reporting that liver metastasis are associated with decreased OS (p = 0.001).²⁴

Beside its impact on OS, a recent meta-analysis including 1504 177Lu-PSMA-617 treated mCRPC patients confirmed that the presence of visceral metastasis is associated with low biochemical response rate and worse PFS.²⁵

Furthermore, Kessel et al.²⁶ reported that patients with liver metastases have worse outcomes compared to those with lung or lymph node metastases. The WARMTH multicenter study evaluated the impact of the extent of the bone involvement on OS mCRPC patients receiving 177Lu-PSMA-617 and found that the extent of bone involvement correlated negatively with the OS after RLT.²⁷

Notably, biochemical progressive disease after 1–2 courses of 177Lu-PSMA-617 was an independent predictor of shorter OS in the recently published REALTY study investigating 254 mCRPC patients treated with RLT everyday academic practice.²⁸

Concerning the impact of previous antineoplastic treatment on response to RLT current literature reports conflicting data. A retrospective study including 167 177Lu-PSMA-617 treated mCRPC patients evaluated clinical outcomes stratified according to previous taxane chemotherapy. Median OS was 10.7 mo for taxane-retreated patients and 27.1 mo for taxane-naïve patients. Median radiographic PFS (rPFS) was 6.0 mo for taxane-pretreated patients and 8.8 mo for taxane-naïve patients. Further, PSA response was 40% in taxane-pretreated patients vs 57% in taxane naïve patients.²¹ In addition, second line cabazitaxel chemotherapy was reported in a retrospective trial as indicator for poor survival.²⁶ This finding was confirmed by the multicenter WARMTH trial, where significant negative prognosticators of OS were prior chemotherapy in patients with < 6 bone lesions. Furthermore, patients with prior radium-223-therapy showed longer OS in the WARMTH trial.²⁷ Further prior treatment with ARSI for less than 12 months has been reported to be associated with worse OS during treatment of Lu-PSMA-617 with the radiosentitizer idronoxil (NOX66).²⁹ In contrast, there exist data that neither pre-treatments with abiraterone/enzalutamide nor docetaxel/cabazitaxel nor distribution of metastases affected survival and rate of response to PSMA-RLT.³⁰

FDG uptake

Overall, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake is a reliable marker to assess tumor burden in various tumors including PC. Suman et al.³¹ demonstrated in a cohort of 35 177Lu-PSMA-617 treated patients, that high FDG uptake (SUV_max > 15) correlates with lack of response, progressive disease and short PFS. In addition, PET imaging analyses were conducted using whole-body segmentation quantifying molecular tumor volume. Interestingly, this analysis identified FDG-positive tumor volume and mean intensity of PSMA- avid tumor uptake as biomarker for OS.³² Very recently, FDG positive/PSMA negative lesions have claimed as predictor for short OS during RLT as a significantly lower OS rates were observed in patients with at least one FDG + /PSMA- lesion at baseline PET/CTs with a median OS of 6.0 ± 0.5 months. In comparison, patients without any FDG + /PSMA-lesions had a median OS of 16.0 ± 2.5 months.³³ However, there exists also one small trial with 18 patients, where intensity of activity on FDG PEt alone was not predictive of a treatment response.³⁴

A representative picture of a patient with FDG + /PSMA + liver lesions who did not respond (PSA, imaging) to 177Lu-PSMA RLT is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

18 F-FDG PET-CT (a) and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT (b) images show an high uptake of FDG (SUV Max 9,25) in the liver metastasis with no relevant 68Ga-PSMA uptake.

Imaging biomarkers

PSMA total tumor volume and PSMA tumor intensity

Generally, total tumor volume (TTV) is calculated by summarizing the volumes of segmented lesions to obtain the whole-body tumor volume ager subtracting physiologic PSA accumulation in the liver, bladder, spleen, kidn.ey, tear, small bowel and salivary glands from foci with pathological PSMA uptake.³⁵

There exist several studies reporting that the PSMA TTV is associated with OS and/or PSA response during 177Lu-PSMA-617 treatment.^17,36–³⁸ Complementary or as alternative to TTV, the intensity of PSMA activity on screening imaging correlated strongly to treatment response. Mean PSMA standard uptake value (SUV) was 6 ± 4 in those without response versus 10 ± 4 in those with response (p < 0.04).³⁴

A recently published phase I/II study combining Lu-PSMA-617 with the radiosensitizer idronoxil (NOX66) observed that higher PSMA SUVmean correlated with treatment response, while higher PSMA tumor volume was associated with worse OS.²⁹

Furthermore, molecular imaging-based response using tumor-to-liver ratio (TLR) was independently associated with PFS suggesting that molecular imaging-based response assessment with PSMA PET using normalization of the total lesion PSMA over healthy liver tissue uptake could be an appropriate biomarker to monitor RLT in mCRPC patients and to predict PFS of this treatment modality.¹²

Bone scan index (BSI)

Bone scintigraphy is still one of the first-line imaging modalities for the screening of bone metastasis in patients with PC. The amount (%) of bone metastasis can be calculated using a bone scan index thanks to recent advances in quantitative bone scintigraphy. Since an artificial neural network was applied for hot-spot characterization and quantitation, BSI has become a simple, reproducible and practical means of quantifying bone metastasis. Thus, BSI is presently considered as an imaging biomarker of bone metastasis.³⁹

Ferdinandus et al.³² recently described in 50 patients treated by 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the ANZCTR trial (NCT12615000912583) where patients underwent baseline PSMA-PET, FDG-PET, and planar 99mTc-bone scan imaging that BSI is a significant biomarker prognostic of OS. Thus, BSI can be considered as biomarker in only bone metastatic disease, but admittedly most mCRPC present also with lymph node and/or visceral metastatic load.

Nomograms to predict outcomes

Gafita et al.⁴⁰ were able to develop nomograms to predict outcomes in patients who are candidates for 177Lu-PSMA using mCRPC patients who had received 177Lu-PSMA as part of the previous phase II trials (NCT03042312, ACTRN12615000912583) or compassionate access programs. Summarizing, three different nomograms to predict OS, PSA-PFS and PSA response ⩾ 50% were developed and externally validated incorporating prognostic variables like tumor PSMA expression, number of PSMA-positive metastatic lesions, and disease site based on molecular imaging TNM classification system. Interestingly, nomograms support preclinical findings and suggest that high levels of tumor PSMA expression is a prerequisite for favorable outcome following 177Lu-PSMA. In addition, bone disease is less likely to be adequately controlled with 177Lu-PSMA.

Blood based biomarkers

PSA and PSA doubling time

Measurement of PSA is the most common serum marker to detect PC as well as to predict tumor recurrence and therapy response in patients with PC.^41–43 Even during 177Lu-PSMA-617 treatment, PSA decline after the first and the second therapy cycle was reported in few studies as predictor for therapy response as well as for prolonged OS.^{26,30,37,38,44} For example PSA changes 6 weeks after 177Lu-PSMA-617 initiation has been proposed as an early indicator of long-term clinical outcome as a PSA decline ⩾ 30% at 6 weeks was associated with longer OS (16.7 mo) compared to stable PSA (11.8 mo) or PSA progression (6.5 mo).⁴⁴ In addition, it has been demonstrated that patients with negative serum PSA doubling time (PSA-DT) harbored superior 1-year PFS compared to those with positive serum PSA-DT (52.5 vs 47.5%) (p = 0.029).³¹

Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)

Next, the presence of high LDH levels was associated with poor OS in several trials assessing its predictive impact during RLT.^23,32,45,46 Moreover, LDH kinetics within two to three months during therapy has been reported as predictive biomarker in a retrospective trial including 137 patients.⁴⁶ However, another trial did not confirm this finding.³⁷

C-reactive protein (CRP)

The pretreatment CRP value was also associated with OS (HR: 1.07, p = 0.02) in a retrospective trial comprising 38 patients treated by 177Lu-PSMA-617.³⁷ Further a CRP value of > 20 mg/L had a negative impact on any PSA decline during therapy (p = 0.006).¹⁷

Hemoglobin (Hb)

A multicenter trial including data of 61 patients pretreated by with abiraterone/enzalutamide (75.4%) and docetaxel/cabazitaxel (68.9%) who received three cycles of PSMA-RLT depicted that the levels of basal Hb were able to predict survival of patients.³⁰ Similarly, normal pre-treatment Hb levels were predictive for a ⩾ 50% PSA decline during therapy, while lower pre-treatment Hb levels were associated with a lack of PSA declines.^17,30 However, the trial from Grubmüller and colleagues did not confirm this finding possibly caused by the relatively low patient number included in this trial.³⁷

Platelet count

Ferdinandus and collegues reported already four years ago that platelet counts (>300 G/L; p < 0.001) have a negative impact on any PSA decline.¹⁷

Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)

Retrospective analyses reported a combined predictive and prognostic impact of ALP levels < 200 concerning PSA PFS (41 versus 18 wks) and OS (56 vs 28 weeks).⁴⁷ Even other studies reported similar findings.^32,46,48

Summarizing, Figure 3 illustrates an overview on clinical, blood-based and imaging-based biomarkers that can be adopted in daily routine stratified according to its predictive or prognostic value.

Figure 3.

Biomarkers associated with no/short response to 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy.

Molecular biomarkers

Due to rapid technological developments, diverse types of biomarkers have been detected at genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic, immunomic, and cellular levels claiming to investigate its significance also in the field of RTL.

Recently, an Austrian trial assessed by immunohistochemistry the association of tissue PSMA expression in PSMA PET positive metastatic biopsies of 10 mCRPC patients among them 9 patients were treated by 177Lu-PSMA-617. They found that assessment of PSMA presence at biopsy is not a reliable predictor of response to 177Lu-PSMA-617.⁴⁹ Similarly, to the negative study on protein levels in tissue, also on mRNA level PSMA does not display strong prognostic ability.⁴⁸ However, in our hand, when interpreting the results of these trials, apart from the small patient collective, tumor heterogeneity among both patients and different metastases must be taken into consideration claiming to further investigation of the prognostic impact of tissue based PSMA expression.

PSMA expression measured on circulating tumor cells (CTC) (using the ADNA test) has been reported from a Japanese study group to be predictive of poorer treatment response, shorter PSA PFS and OS during 177Lu-PSMA-617 treatment suggesting that PSMA expression in CTC may be a novel poor prognostic marker for CRPC.⁵⁰ In addition, Kessel et al.⁴⁸ conducted a study performing molecular analysis of CTC (Dynabeads™ mRNA DIRECT™ Purification Kit) of 19 mCRPC patients receiving177Lu-PSMA-617 demonstrating that that full length androgen receptor (AR-FL) and its splice variant AR-V7 might serve as prognostic biomarkers displaying high tumor burden in mCRPC patient prior to PSMA-RLT.

Genomic instability is mostly associated with defects in the DNA repair system suggesting that DDR alterations may be predictive also for response to RLT. Indeed, one study found higher PSMA expression in patients with deleterious aberrations in BRCA2 and ATM than in molecularly unselected mCRPC biopsies.⁵¹

Conclusion

Recently, 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy has shown to prolong PFS and OS in mCRPC patients leading to a possible FDA/EMA approval that is expected in the next few months. In this setting, RLT compete with alternative therapeutic strategies such as cabazitaxel. In addition, combinational studies of 177Lu-PSMA-617 with standard treatments or with additional experimental substances not only in mCRPC but also in earlier therapy lines are currently ongoing. Different biomarkers are available that are associated with response to therapy.

One of the major challenges for clinicians is to select those patients who would best benefit from this therapy and to precociously change to alterative therapeutic strategies in non-responders to propose a personalized treatment approach. However, markers to reliably help selection of a specific therapy or sequence in the setting of mCRPC with different previous lines of treatment are not yet available.

Footnotes

Author contributions

Isabel Heidegger: Conceptualization; Methodology; Project administration; Visualization; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Claudia Kesch: Conceptualization; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Alexander Kretschmer: Conceptualization; Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Igor Tsaur: Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Francesco Ceci: Conceptualization; Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Massimo Valerio: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Derya Tilki: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Giancarlo Marra: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Felix Preisser: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Christian D. Fankhauser: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Fabio Zattoni: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Peter Chiu: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Ignacio Puche-Sanz: Investigation; Validation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Jonathan Olivier: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Roderik C. N. van den Bergh: Conceptualization; Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Veeru Kasivisvanathan: Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Andreas Pircher: Conceptualization; Investigation; Supervision; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Irene Virgolini: Conceptualization; Investigation; Methodology; Supervision; Writing – original draft.

Giorgio Gandaglia: Conceptualization; Data curation; Investigation; Project administration; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Claudia Kesch receives research funding from Advanced Accelerator Applications

References

Siegel

Miller

Jemal

Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70: 7–30.

Huggins

Hodges

CV.

Studies on prostatic cancer: I. The effect of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate.1941. J Urol 2002; 168: 9–12.

Heidegger

Massoner

Eder

, et al. Novel therapeutic approaches for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2013; 138: 248–256.

Giacinti

Poti

Roberto

, et al. Molecular basis of drug resistance and insights for new treatment approaches in mCRPC. Anticancer Res 2018; 38: 6029–6039.

Wade

Kyprianou

Profiling prostate cancer therapeutic resistance. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19: 904.

Cornford

van den Bergh

RCN

Briers

, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II-2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2021; 79: 263–282.

Barinka

Rojas

Slusher

, et al. Glutamate carboxypeptidase II in diagnosis and treatment of neurologic disorders and prostate cancer. Curr Med Chem 2012; 19: 856–870.

Demirci

Sahin

Ocak

, et al. Normal distribution pattern and physiological variants of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging. Nucl Med Commun 2016; 37: 1169–1179.

Rischpler

Beck

Okamoto

, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC uptake in cervical, celiac, and sacral ganglia as an important pitfall in prostate cancer PET imaging. J Nucl Med 2018; 59: 1406–1411.

10.

Mokoala

Lawal

Lengana

, et al. PSMA theranostics: science and practice. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 3904.

11.

Ferdinandus

Fendler

Hadaschik

, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen targeted PET imaging for prostate cancer recurrence. Curr Opin Urol 2020; 30: 635–640.

12.

Khreish

Wiessner

Rosar

, et al. Response assessment and prediction of progression-free survival by (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT based on tumor-to-liver ratio (TLR) in patients with mCRPC undergoing (177)Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy. Biomolecules 2021; 11: 1099.

13.

Ceci

Bianchi

Borghesi

, et al. Prediction nomogram for (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in different clinical settings of PSA failure after radical treatment for prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47: 136–146.

14.

Hofman

Emmett

Sandhu

, et al. [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet 2021; 397: 797–804.

15.

Sartor

de Bono

Chi

, et al. Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 1091–1103.

16.

Sandhu

Guo

Hofman

MS.

Radionuclide therapy in prostate cancer: from standalone to combination PSMA theranostics. J Nucl Med 2021; 62: 1660–1668.

17.

Ferdinandus

Eppard

Gaertner

, et al. Predictors of response to radioligand therapy of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer with 177Lu-PSMA-617. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 312–319.

18.

Gadot

Davidson

Aharon

, et al. Clinical variables associated with PSA Response to Lutetium-177-PSMA ([177Lu]-PSMA-617) radionuclide treatment in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12: 1078.

19.

von Eyben

Bauman

von Eyben

, et al. Optimizing PSMA radioligand therapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21: 9054.

20.

Ahmadzadehfar

Schlolaut

Fimmers

, et al. Predictors of overall survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients receiving [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 103108–103116.

21.

Barber

Singh

Kulkarni

, et al. Clinical outcomes of (177)Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy in earlier and later phases of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer grouped by previous taxane chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 2019; 60: 955–962.

22.

Ahmadzadehfar

Rahbar

Baum

, et al. Prior therapies as prognostic factors of overall survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. A WARMTH multicenter study (the 617 trial). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 113–122.

23.

Heck

Tauber

Schwaiger

, et al. Treatment outcome, toxicity, and predictive factors for radioligand therapy with (177)Lu-PSMA-I&T in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2019; 75: 920–926.

24.

Seifert

Seitzer

Herrmann

, et al. Analysis of PSMA expression and outcome in patients with advanced Prostate Cancer receiving (177)Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy. Theranostics 2020; 10: 7812–7820.

25.

Satapathy

Mittal

Sood

Visceral metastases as predictors of response and survival outcomes in patients of castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with 177Lu-Labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 2020; 45: 935–942.

26.

Kessel

Seifert

Schafers

, et al. Second line chemotherapy and visceral metastases are associated with poor survival in patients with mCRPC receiving (177)Lu-PSMA-617. Theranostics 2019; 9: 4841–4848.

27.

Ahmadzadehfar

Matern

Baum

, et al. The impact of the extent of the bone involvement on overall survival and toxicity in mCRPC patients receiving [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617: a WARMTH multicentre study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 4067–4076.

28.

Khreish

Ghazal

Marlowe

, et al. 177 Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: initial 254-patient results from a prospective registry (REALITY Study). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49: 1075–1085.

29.

Pathmanandavel

Crumbaker

Yam

, et al. (177)Lutetium PSMA-617 and idronoxil (NOX66) in men with end-stage metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (LuPIN): patient outcomes and predictors of treatment response of a Phase I/II trial. J Nucl Med. Epub ahead of print 29 July 2021. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262552.

30.

Rasul

Hartenbach

Wollenweber

, et al. Prediction of response and survival after standardized treatment with 7400 MBq (177)Lu-PSMA-617 every 4 weeks in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1650–1657.

31.

Suman

Parghane

Joshi

, et al. Therapeutic efficacy, prognostic variables and clinical outcome of (177)Lu-PSMA-617 PRLT in progressive mCRPC following multiple lines of treatment: prognostic implications of high FDG uptake on dual tracer PET-CT vis-a-vis Gleason score in such cohort. Br J Radiol 2019; 92: 20190380.

32.

Ferdinandus

Violet

Sandhu

, et al. Prognostic biomarkers in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving [177Lu]-PSMA-617. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47: 2322–2327.

33.

Michalski

Klein

Brueggemann

, et al. Assessing response to [(177)Lu]PSMA radioligand therapy using modified PSMA PET progression criteria. J Nucl Med 2021; 62: 1741–1746.

34.

Emmett

Crumbaker

, et al. Results of a prospective phase 2 pilot trial of (177)Lu-PSMA-617 Therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer including imaging predictors of treatment response and patterns of progression. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2019; 17: 15–22.

35.

Begum

Thieme

Eberhardt

, et al. The effect of total tumor volume on the biologically effective dose to tumor and kidneys for (177)Lu-labeled PSMA peptides. J Nucl Med 2018; 59: 929–933.

36.

Seifert

Kessel

Schlack

, et al. PSMA PET total tumor volume predicts outcome of patients with advanced prostate cancer receiving [(177)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy in a bicentric analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1200–1210.

37.

Grubmuller

Senn

Kramer

, et al. Response assessment using (68)Ga-PSMA ligand PET in patients undergoing (177)Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 46: 1063–1072.

38.

Grubmuller

Rasul

Baltzer

, et al. Response assessment using [(68) Ga]Ga-PSMA ligand PET in patients undergoing systemic therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Prostate 2020; 80: 74–82.

39.

Nakajima

Edenbrandt

Mizokami

Bone scan index: a new biomarker of bone metastasis in patients with prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2017; 24: 668–673.

40.

Gafita

Calais

Grogan

, et al. Nomograms to predict outcomes after (177)Lu-PSMA therapy in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: an international, multicentre, retrospective study. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22: 1115–1125.

41.

Heidegger

Fritz

Klocker

, et al. Age-adjusted PSA levels in prostate cancer prediction: updated results of the tyrol prostate cancer early detection program. PLoS ONE 2015; 10: e0134134.

42.

Andriole

Crawford

Grubb

, et al. Prostate cancer screening in the randomized prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104: 125–132.

43.

Schroder

Hugosson

Roobol

, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 2014; 384: 2027–2035.

44.

Gafita

Heck

Rauscher

, et al. Early prostate-specific antigen changes and clinical outcome after (177)Lu-PSMA radionuclide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2020; 61: 1476–1483.

45.

Rathke

Holland-Letz

Mier

, et al. Response prediction of (177)Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy using prostate-specific antigen, chromogranin A, and lactate dehydrogenase. J Nucl Med 2020; 61: 689–695.

46.

Yordanova

Linden

Hauser

, et al. The value of tumor markers in men with metastatic prostate cancer undergoing [(177) Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy. Prostate 2020; 80: 17–27.

47.

Brauer

Grubert

Roll

, et al. (177)Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy and outcome in patients with metastasized castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44: 1663–1670.

48.

Kessel

Seifert

Weckesser

, et al. Molecular analysis of circulating tumor cells of metastatic castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Patients receiving (177)Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy. Theranostics 2020; 10: 7645–7655.

49.

Stangl-Kremser

Rasul

Tosoian

, et al. Single-lesion prostate-specific membrane antigen Protein expression (PSMA) and response to [(177)Lu]-PSMA-ligand therapy in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci 2021; 30: 63–66.

50.

Nagaya

Nagata

, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen in circulating tumor cells is a new poor prognostic marker for castration-resistant prostate cancer. PLoS ONE 2020; 15: e0226219.

51.

Paschalis

Sheehan

Riisnaes

, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen heterogeneity and DNA repair defects in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2019; 76: 469–478.

Biomarkers to personalize treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617 in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer - a state of the art review

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer

PSMA in diagnostic and therapy

Clinical biomarkers

FDG uptake

Imaging biomarkers

PSMA total tumor volume and PSMA tumor intensity

Bone scan index (BSI)

Nomograms to predict outcomes

Blood based biomarkers

PSA and PSA doubling time

Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)

C-reactive protein (CRP)

Hemoglobin (Hb)

Platelet count

Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)

Molecular biomarkers

Conclusion

Footnotes

Author contributions

Conflict of interest statement

Funding

References