Next Article in Journal
Considerations for Developing a Reassessment Process: Report from the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration’s Reassessment and Uptake Working Group
Next Article in Special Issue
Correlation of Urine Loss after Catheter Removal and Early Continence in Men Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy
Previous Article in Journal
Pretreatment Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictive Marker of Response to Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Previous Article in Special Issue
Renal and Salivary Gland Functions after Three Cycles of PSMA-617 Therapy Every Four Weeks in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
 
 
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Single-Center Comparison of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA PET–CT for Imaging Prostate Cancer

1
Department of Nuclear Medicine with PET-Center, Clinic Ottakring (Wilhelminenspital), 1160 Vienna, Austria
2
Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
3
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Hanusch Hospital, 1160 Vienna, Austria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(5), 4167-4173; https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28050353
Received: 23 August 2021 / Revised: 4 October 2021 / Accepted: 13 October 2021 / Published: 15 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Collection New Insights into Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment)

Abstract

:
Introduction: the diagnostic performance of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA PET–CT imaging was compared retrospectively to [18F]-PSMA PET–CT in prostate cancer patients with recurrent disease and in the primary staging of selected patients with advanced local and possible metastatic disease. Methods: We retrospectively selected a total of 100 patients, who were consecutively examined in our department, with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy or who had progressive local and possible metastatic disease in the last 3 months prior to this investigation. All patients were examined with a dedicated PET–CT scanner (Biograph; Siemens Healthineers). A total of 250 MBq (3.5 MBq per kg bodyweight, range 230–290 MBq) of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA or [18-F]-PSMA was applied intravenously. PET images were performed 1 h post-injection (skull base to mid-thigh). The maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of PSMA-positive lesions and the mean standardized uptake value (SUVmean) of the right liver lobe were measured. Results: All but 9/50 of the patients (18%; PSA range: 0.01–0.7 µg/L) studied with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and 6/50 of the ones (12%; PSA range: 0.01–4.2) studied with [18F]-PSMA had at least one positive PSMA lesion shown by PET–CT. The total number of lesions was higher with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA (209 vs. 191); however, the median number of lesions was one for [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and two for [18F]-PSMA. Interestingly, the median SUVmean of the right liver lobe was slightly higher for [18F]-PSMA (11.8 vs. 8.9). Conclusions: [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA have comparable detection rates for the assessment of residual disease in patients with recurrent or primary progressive prostate cancer. The uptake in the liver is moderately different, and therefore at least the SUVs of the lesions in both studies would not be comparable.

1. Introduction

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies in men, with a total of 1,414,259 new cases and an estimated 375,000 deaths worldwide in 2020 [1]. The treatment management of PCa depends on the site and extent of disease (local/nodal vs. systemic disease) [2]. Even though several novel pharmacologic drugs have been introduced to the therapeutic armamentarium against metastatic PCa, advanced disease still represents a fatal condition for these patients [3]. For proper staging, imaging modalities such as CT, multiparametric MRI and bone scans are recommended in patients with intermediate risk and localized or locally advanced high-risk PCa [2]. In cases of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy, functional PET–CT imaging using radiolabeled choline or prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands have been introduced [4]. PSMA is a transmembrane protein that is expressed in normal and neoplastic prostate tissue, with a structure composed of a 707-amino-acid external portion, a 19-amino-acid internal portion and a 24-amino-acid transmembrane portion [5]. In light of its specificity, PSMA has been selected as the biological target of a number of radiolabeled small molecules, such as [68Ga]-PSMA-11, [18F]-DCFPyL and [18F]-PSMA-1007 [6]. PSMA ligands can not only be coupled to diagnostic radionuclides such as [68Ga], [18F] and [64Cu], but also to therapeutic radionuclides (e.g., [177Lu], and [225Ac]), allowing a theranostic approach to PC diagnosis and treatment [7]. Previous studies have shown a high diagnostic performance of [68Ga]-labeled urea-based PSMA in the detection of lymph node metastases in BCR patients [8]. Additionally, PSMA ligands in molecular PET imaging provide a higher tumor detection rate as compared to choline ligands in patients with BCR, especially in cases of very low PSA levels [9].
PSMA-PET has become a highly accurate staging tool in multiple settings in clinical routine, although its exact uses in clinical practice remain to be determined. We use it in our department for staging treatment-naïve locally advanced disease as well as recurrent and metastatic disease. To overcome the logistical difficulties of obtaining a [68Ga] generator, [64Cu]-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA have been introduced. [64Cu] possesses a relatively long half-life (t1/2) of 12.7 h, allowing imaging of smaller molecules, larger, slower clearing proteins and nanoparticles. Uniquely, it decays by three processes, namely, positron (17.8%, Emax = 0.65 MeV), electron capture (43.8%) and beta decay (38.4%, Emax = 0.57 MeV), and can thus be used for both treatment and imaging [10]. Its lower positron range compared to the commonly used [68Ga] grants a better spatial resolution. The high diagnostic potential of [64Cu]-PSMA PET–CT imaging has been clinically investigated in the past, and different chelators to [64Cu] are used (11). DOTA and NODAGA chelators form stable complexes with Cu and have been clinically used [11]. Another PSMA ligand which was introduced recently is 64Cu-PSMA-BCH, which was shown to have a high stability in vivo with a lower uptake in the liver than 64Cu-PSMA-617 [12]. PSMA I&T labeled with 64Cu also showed the feasibility of PET imaging through in vitro and in vivo studies [13]. In patients with low PSA values, a better performance was observed for 64Cu-PSMA-617 PET/CT compared to 18F-choline PET/CT in restaging after BCR [14].
In contrast, [18F] has been well established as a diagnostic radionuclide due to its physical and nuclear characteristics: a high positron decay ratio (97%), a relatively short half-life (109.7 min) and low positron energy (Emax = 0.63 MeV) [15].
The aim of our study is to evaluate the uptake behavior of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA with DOTAGA as a possible stable chelator compared to [18F]-PSMA PET–CT in a routine clinical setting in PCa patients.

2. Methods

We selected retrospectively a total number of 100 patients (50 examined with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and 50 with [18F]-PSMA PET–CT), who were consecutively examined in our department, with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy or had progressive local disease in the last 3 months and were scheduled for either radiation or systemic therapy. Routinely, we perform, due to logistic reasons, [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA one day per week and [18F]-PSMA PET–CT one day per week. All patients were examined with a dedicated PET–CT scanner (Biograph; Siemens Healthineers) in compliance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and the responsible regulatory bodies in Austria. Formal consent was obtained from all patients prior to examination. A total of 250 MBq (3.5 MBq per kg bodyweight, range 230–290 MBq) of [64Cu]-DOTAGA PSMA or [18-F] PSMA was applied intravenously. PET images were performed 1 h post-injection (skull base to mid-thigh). The SUVmax of the suspected lesions and the SUVmean of the right liver lobe were measured.

Statistical Analysis

For the two patient cohorts the median values of age, PSA value at time of PET–CT, the SUVmean of the right liver lobe and the SUVmax of the lesion with the highest uptake as well as the total number of lesions are presented in Table 1.

3. Results

Patient baseline characteristics are listed in Table 1. The two patient cohorts were comparable, as we found no significant differences with regard to age range, PSA values at the time of examination and the SUVmax of the hottest lesion (Table 2). In Figure 1 and Figure 2 we show one representable patient case for each cohort.
In total, 209 lesions were detected with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA, whereas 191 lesions were with [18F]-PSMA. All but 9/50 (18%) of the patients (PSA range 0.01–0.7) studied with [64Cu]-DOTAGA PSMA and 6/50 (12%) of the ones (PSA range 0.01–4.2) studied with [18F]-PSMA had no lesions shown by PET–CT. We did not find significant differences in median PSA values between the two groups (p = 0.1) or any association between prostate uptake and the number of positive lesions in PSMA PET.

4. Discussion

The results in this study in regard to negative findings are superior to our previous study with [64Cu]-NODAG-PSMA, where 20.8% of the patients did not show any lesions in PET scans [11]. However, the previous study was performed on a stand-alone PET scan (without CT), and therefore this comparison is of limited significance.
The total number of lesions was higher with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA (209 vs. 191); however, the median value of lesions was one for [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and two for [18F]-PSMA, and thus failed to be statistically significant (p = 0.07). Interestingly, the median value of SUVmean of the right liver lobe was significantly higher with [18F]-PSMA (p < 0.05). We measure and mention this parameter in our PET reports in order to compare different studies at different time points, or if they are performed with different radiopharmaceuticals.
In our study, we found comparable results between [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA in our patients. The performance of both radiopharmaceuticals were comparable and better than our previously published results with [64Cu]-NODAGA-PSMA PET, with the limitation that the latter was performed on a stand-alone PET scanner [11]. This suggests in vivo stability of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA as it could be shown for [64Cu]-NODAGA-PSMA in our previous study [11]. Additionally, as mentioned elsewhere, [64Cu] as a radionuclide for PSMA shows more favorable physical characteristics, such as a longer half-life of 12.7 h and a small positron range with increased spatial resolution [16]. Interestingly, in a study, 64 Cu-PSMA-617-PET was demonstrated to be feasible for imaging prostate cancer for both the primary tumor site and metastases, whereas later imaging 2–22 h post-injection showed no additional, clinically relevant benefit compared to the early scans [17].
It was not the aim of this study to look for any impact of Gleason score (GS) on PET results; however, in a previous publication we could not find any correlation between GS and PSMA-PET [11]. Furthermore, downregulation of PSMA expression due to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) might have an influence on size reduction in tumors [18], and some of our patients were under ADT treatment. Additionally, there are published limitations of [68Ga]-PSMA with a very low expression of PSMA in dedifferentiated tumors, the absence of a relationship between [68Ga]-PSMA uptake and Gleason score in addition to the downregulation of PSMA expression by ADT [18]. The introduction of copper as a ligand in primary staging and in recurrent disease demonstrates an excellent resolution of the detected lesions with a very high lesion-to-background contrast. Grubmüller et al. investigated the diagnostic potential of [64Cu]-PSMA-617 PET/CT in primary staging or as PSMA radioligand therapy in 29 PCa patients [19]. The preliminary results of this study highlighted the high potential of [64Cu]-PSMA ligands in patients with recurrent disease and in the primary staging of selected patients with progressive local disease. Our results with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA compared to [18F]-PSMA PET–CT demonstrate a similar high detection rate of recurrent disease and a high stability in vivo for [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA.
The limitations of this study are the retrospective nature, lack of intra-individual comparison, that the histopathology of all lesions was not obtainable in our patients and that only the number of lesions were analyzed. However, PCa was proven by biopsy or histopathology.

5. Conclusions

[64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA have comparable detection rates for the assessment of residual disease in patients with recurrent or primary progressive PCa. The uptake in the liver is moderately different, and therefore the SUV of the lesions in both studies would not be comparable.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.M.; methodology, S.M.; validation, S.M.; formal analysis, S.M., A.L., R.L. and S.Z.; investigation, S.M. and A.L.; resources, S.M. and A.L.; data curation, S.M. and A.L.; writing—original draft, S.M. and A.L.; writing—review and editing, A.L. and R.L.; supervision, S.M.; project administration, S.M.; funding acquisition, A.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

All patients were examined with a dedicated PET-CT scanner (Biograph, Siemens, Healthineers) in compliance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and the responsible regulatory bodies in Austria.

Informed Consent Statement

Formal consent was obtained from all patients prior to examination.

Data Availability Statement

The above-mentioned data were acquired from our in-house PET–CT center. No other publicly archived dataset was analyzed.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sung, H.; Ferlay, J.; Siegel, R.L.; Laversanne, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Jemal, A.; Bray, F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2021, 71, 209–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Heidenreich, A.; Bastian, P.J.; Bellmunt, J.; Bolla, M.; Joniau, S.; van der Kwast, T.; Mason, M.; Matveev, V.; Wiegel, T.; Zattoni, F.; et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur. Urol. 2014, 65, 124–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Swami, U.; McFarland, T.R.; Nussenzveig, R.; Agarwal, N. Advanced Prostate Cancer: Treatment Advances and Future Directions. Trends Cancer 2020, 6, 702–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. von Eyben, F.E.; Picchio, M.; von Eyben, R.; Rhee, H.; Bauman, G. 68Ga-Labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur. Urol. Focus 2018, 4, 686–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  5. Chang, S.S. Overview of prostate-specific membrane antigen. Rev. Urol. 2004, 6, S13–S18. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Pastorino, S.; Riondato, M.; Uccelli, L.; Giovacchini, G.; Giovannini, E.; Duce, V.; Ciarmiello, A. Toward the Discovery and Development of PSMA Targeted Inhibitors for Nuclear Medicine Applications. Curr. Radiopharm. 2020, 13, 63–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Lütje, S.; Heskamp, S.; Cornelissen, A.S.; Poeppel, T.D.; van den Broek, S.A.; Rosenbaum-Krumme, S.; Bockisch, A.; Gotthardt, M.; Rijpkema, M.; Boerman, O.C. PSMA Ligands for Radionuclide Imaging and Therapy of Prostate Cancer: Clinical Status. Theranostics 2015, 5, 1388–1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  8. Rauscher, I.; Maurer, T.; Beer, A.J.; Graner, F.P.; Haller, B.; Weirich, G.; Doherty, A.; Gschwend, J.E.; Schwaiger, M.; Eiber, M. Value of 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET for the Assessment of Lymph Node Metastases in Prostate Cancer Patients with Biochemical Recurrence: Comparison with Histopathology After Salvage Lymphadenectomy. J. Nucl. Med. 2016, 57, 1713–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  9. Morigi, J.J.; Stricker, P.D.; van Leeuwen, P.J.; Tang, R.; Ho, B.; Nguyen, Q.; Hruby, G.; Fogarty, G.; Jagavkar, R.; Kneebone, A.; et al. Prospective Comparison of 18F-Fluoromethylcholine Versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in Prostate Cancer Patients Who Have Rising PSA After Curative Treatment and Are Being Considered for Targeted Therapy. J. Nucl. Med. 2015, 56, 1185–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  10. Williams, H.A.; Robinson, S.; Julyan, P.; Zweit, J.; Hastings, D. A comparison of PET imaging characteristics of various copper radioisotopes. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2005, 32, 1473–1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Sevcenco, S.; Klingler, H.C.; Eredics, K.; Friedl, A.; Schneeweiss, J.; Knoll, P.; Kunit, T.; Lusuardi, L.; Mirzaei, S. Application of Cu-64 NODAGA-PSMA PET in Prostate Cancer. Adv. Ther. 2018, 35, 779–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, T.; Liu, C.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, N.; Guo, X.; Xia, L.; Jiang, J.; Xie, Q.; Yan, K.; Rowe, S.P.; et al. 64Cu-PSMA-BCH: A new radiotracer for delayed PET imaging of prostate cancer. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Lee, C.H.; Lim, I.; Woo, S.K.; Kim, K.I.; Lee, K.C.; Song, K.; Choi, C.W.; Lim, S.M. The Feasibility of 64Cu-PSMA I&T PET for Prostate Cancer. Cancer Biother. Radiopharm. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cantiello, F.; Crocerossa, F.; Russo, G.I.; Gangemi, V.; Ferro, M.; Vartolomei, M.D.; Lucarelli, G.; Mirabelli, M.; Scafuro, C.; Ucciero, G.; et al. Comparison Between 64Cu-PSMA-617 PET/CT and 18F-Choline PET/CT Imaging in Early Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Biochemical Recurrence. Clin. Genitourin. Cancer 2018, 16, 385–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Jacobson, O.; Kiesewetter, D.O.; Chen, X. Fluorine-18 radiochemistry, labeling strategies and synthetic routes. Bioconjug. Chem. 2015, 26, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Evangelista, L.; Luigi, M.; Cascini, G.L. New issues for copper-64: From precursor to innovative PET tracers in clinical oncology. Curr. Radiopharm. 2013, 6, 117–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Hoberück, S.; Wunderlich, G.; Michler, E.; Hölscher, T.; Walther, M.; Seppelt, D.; Platzek, I.; Zöphel, K.; Kotzerke, J. Dual-time-point 64 Cu-PSMA-617-PET/CT in patients suffering from prostate cancer. J. Labelled Comp. Radiopharm. 2019, 62, 523–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Afshar-Oromieh, A.; Avtzi, E.; Giesel, F.L.; Holland-Letz, T.; Linhart, H.G.; Eder, M.; Eisenhut, M.; Boxler, S.; Hadaschik, B.A.; Kratochwil, C.; et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2015, 42, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  19. Grubmüller, B.; Baum, R.P.; Capasso, E.; Singh, A.; Ahmadi, Y.; Knoll, P.; Floth, A.; Righi, S.; Zandieh, S.; Meleddu, C.; et al. 64Cu-PSMA-617 PET/CT imaging of prostate adenocarcinoma: First in-human. Cancer Biother. Radiopharm. 2016, 31, 277–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Primary staging of a treatment-naïve, 75-year-old patient with PCa which has metastasized to the bone, using [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA PET–CT. The PSA value at the time of PET–CT was 47 µg/L. (a) The PSMA-positive primary tumor (SUVmax apical: 9.5; left base: 8.0). (b) The PSMA-positive bone metastases in T10 and T12 (respective SUVmax: 5.3 and 4.6); the arrow in the correlating low-dose CT images point to the metastasis in T10.
Figure 1. Primary staging of a treatment-naïve, 75-year-old patient with PCa which has metastasized to the bone, using [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA PET–CT. The PSA value at the time of PET–CT was 47 µg/L. (a) The PSMA-positive primary tumor (SUVmax apical: 9.5; left base: 8.0). (b) The PSMA-positive bone metastases in T10 and T12 (respective SUVmax: 5.3 and 4.6); the arrow in the correlating low-dose CT images point to the metastasis in T10.
Curroncol 28 00353 g001
Figure 2. Primary staging of a treatment-naïve, 70-year-old patient with PCa metastasizing to the 5th and 9th thoracic vertebrae, using [18F]-PSMA PET–CT. The PSA value at the time of examination was 7.8 µg/L. (a) The PSMA-positive primary tumor (SUVmax 6.4). (b) The PSMA-positive bone metastasis in T5 (SUVmax 3.7).
Figure 2. Primary staging of a treatment-naïve, 70-year-old patient with PCa metastasizing to the 5th and 9th thoracic vertebrae, using [18F]-PSMA PET–CT. The PSA value at the time of examination was 7.8 µg/L. (a) The PSMA-positive primary tumor (SUVmax 6.4). (b) The PSMA-positive bone metastasis in T5 (SUVmax 3.7).
Curroncol 28 00353 g002
Table 1. Patient characteristic of the two groups. Ranges are given in parenthesis.
Table 1. Patient characteristic of the two groups. Ranges are given in parenthesis.
Median Age in yMedian PSA in ng/dlMedian SUVmean of the Liver Total Number of LesionsMedian SUVmax of the Hottest Lesions
[64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA74 (51–90)5.59 (0.01–969)8.9 (5.5–14.9)209 (0–15)10.5 (1.8–65.0)
[18F]-PSMA73 (57–92)4.5 (0.01–220)11.8 (1.8–21.2)191 (0–15)9.2 (3.3–109)
Additionally, we performed a Student’s t-test to identify significant differences between the two patient cohorts.
Table 2. Results of a Student’s t-test for outlining potential significant differences between the two patient cohorts that were either examined with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA PET–CT or [18F]-PSMA PET–CT.
Table 2. Results of a Student’s t-test for outlining potential significant differences between the two patient cohorts that were either examined with [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA PET–CT or [18F]-PSMA PET–CT.
Age in yTotal Number of LesionsPSA Value in ng/dlSUVmax Hottest LesionSUVmean Liver
p-value0.30.80.10.70.000002 *
Statistically significant p-values < 0.05 are marked with (*).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mirzaei, S.; Lipp, R.; Zandieh, S.; Leisser, A. Single-Center Comparison of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA PET–CT for Imaging Prostate Cancer. Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28, 4167-4173. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28050353

AMA Style

Mirzaei S, Lipp R, Zandieh S, Leisser A. Single-Center Comparison of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA PET–CT for Imaging Prostate Cancer. Current Oncology. 2021; 28(5):4167-4173. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28050353

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mirzaei, Siroos, Rainer Lipp, Shahin Zandieh, and Asha Leisser. 2021. "Single-Center Comparison of [64Cu]-DOTAGA-PSMA and [18F]-PSMA PET–CT for Imaging Prostate Cancer" Current Oncology 28, no. 5: 4167-4173. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28050353

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop