article · EJNMMI Research
Abstract Background PSMA-PET/CT became an important means for prostate cancer management. The high-resolution and signal-to-noise ratio of PET is mandatory in primary staging or biochemical relapse that often present with tiny lesions. PSMA-PET is also used to select patients for PSMA-targeted radioligand-therapy, but scanner availability increasingly becomes a bottleneck. The resolution of PSMA-SPECT/CT might be sufficient to tailor PSMA positive vs. negative disease and would help overcome supply limitations. This prospective, monocentric study evaluates the biodistribution and tumor uptake of [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01 in an intra-individual head-to-head comparison with [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 to assess its suitability for phenotyping prior to RLT. Results A cohort of ten patients (median age, 68 y; range, 56–85 y) with advanced-stage, metastatic prostate cancer underwent both unenhanced [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 PET/CT and [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01 SPECT/CT scans with a mean time interval of 6 days (± 1). The tracer uptake in malignant lesions and normal organs was assessed visually and semi-quantitatively using spherical VOIs by two nuclear medicine physicians in consensus. Compared to [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01, [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 displayed a trend toward higher uptake in normal organs. Renal tracer uptake was significantly higher with [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 than with [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01. In the salivary glands and liver, there was no statistically significant difference in uptake between the two tracers, although [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01 displayed a trend toward lower uptake. Conclusion Our study demonstrates intraindividual comparability of [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01 and [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 with respect to normal-organ distribution including typical reference organs such as the liver or salivary glands. If only lesions > 2 cm are considered, [ 99m Tc]Tc-PSMA-GCK01 PSMA-SPECT is a viable, cost-effective alternative to [ 68 Ga]PSMA-11 to stratify patients toward or against PSMA-RLT.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1186/s13550-026-01501-0
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.