Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec 3;65(12):1899-1903.
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.124.268288.

[18F]FDG and [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 Imaging for Outcome Prediction in Patients with High-Grade Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Affiliations

[18F]FDG and [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 Imaging for Outcome Prediction in Patients with High-Grade Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Kerstin Michalski et al. J Nucl Med. .

Erratum in

  • Erratum.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] J Nucl Med. 2025 Jan 3;66(1):149. J Nucl Med. 2025. PMID: 39753369 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Abstract

We aimed to quantitatively investigate the prognostic value of PET-based biomarkers on [18F]FDG and [68Ga]Ga-fibroblast activation protein inhibitor (FAPI)-04 PET/CT in patients with highly aggressive neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) and to compare the visually assessed differences in uptake on both examinations with progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: In this single-center retrospective analysis, 20 patients with high-grade NENs had undergone [18F]FDG and [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET. Both PET scans were visually compared, and the presence of [18F]FDG-positive, [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04-negative (FDG+/FAPI-) lesions was noted. In addition, we assessed maximum, peak, and mean SUV; tumor volume (TV); and total lesion uptake (TLU = TV × SUVmean) for both radiotracers using a 40% lesion-based threshold. The results of quantitative and visual analysis were correlated with PFS using log-rank analysis or univariate Cox regression. PFS was defined radiographically using RECIST 1.1., clinically using signs of disease progression, or as death. Results: Most primary tumors were located in the gastrointestinal tract (13/20 patients, 65%) or were cancer of unknown primary (5/20 patients, 25%). FDG+/FAPI- lesions were found in 9 of 20 patients (45%). Patients with FDG+/FAPI- lesions had a significantly decreased PFS of 4 mo, compared with 9 mo for patients without FDG+/FAPI- metastases (P = 0.0063 [log-rank test]; hazard ratio [HR], 5.637; 95% CI 1.619-26.16; P = 0.0110 [univariate Cox regression]). On univariate analysis, a significant correlation was also found between PFS and TV for both radiotracers ([18F]FDG: mean TV, 258 ± 588 cm3; HR, 1.024 [per 10 cm3]; 95% CI, 1.007-1.046; P = 0.0204) ([68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04: mean TV, 130 ± 192 cm3; HR, 1.032 [per 10 cm3]; 95% CI, 1.001-1.062; P = 0.0277) and TLU on [18F]FDG PET (mean TLU, 1,931 ± 4,248 cm3; HR, 1.004 [per 10 cm3]; 95% CI, 1.001-1.007; P = 0.0135). Conclusion: The presence of discordant FDG+/FAPI- lesions is associated with a significantly shorter PFS, which might indicate more aggressive disease prone to early progression. Dual-tracer PET/CT of patients with highly aggressive NENs could help guide treatment decisions or identify high-risk lesions for additional local therapeutic approaches.

Keywords: FAPI and FDG; discordant lesions; dual-tracer PET/CT; neuroendocrine neoplasms; outcome prediction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Maximum-intensity projection (MIP), CT, PET, and fused images of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT of patient 2. Images show concordant high uptake in multiple lymph node metastases and advanced peritoneal carcinomatosis. In addition, [18F]FDG PET shows osseous metastases not seen on [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET (arrows). Time difference between scans was 1 d.
FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.
Kaplan–Meier curves of PFS of patients with (n = 9, red line) or without (n = 11, blue line) discordant FDG+/FAPI− lesions. Patients with discordant lesions showed significantly shorter median PFS (4 mo) than patients without (9 mo, P = 0.0063).

References

    1. Rindi G, Mete O, Uccella S, et al. . Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms. Endocr Pathol. 2022;33:115–154. - PubMed
    1. Sultana Q, Kar J, Verma A, et al. . A comprehensive review on neuroendocrine neoplasms: presentation, pathophysiology and management. J Clin Med. 2023;12:5138. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fortunati E, Argalia G, Zanoni L, Fanti S, Ambrosini V. New PET radiotracers for the imaging of neuroendocrine neoplasms. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2022;23:703–720. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schwenck J, Sonanini D, Cotton JM, et al. . Advances in PET imaging of cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2023;23:474–490. - PubMed
    1. Bahri H, Laurence L, Edeline J, et al. . High prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET for metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a long-term evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1786–1790. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources