An intra-patient contemporaneous comparison of
18
F-piflufolastat and
18
F-flotufolastat urinary radioactivity and local and pelvic region detection rates
32 Background: PET-based radiopharmaceuticals targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) have become the mainstay of prostate cancer imaging; however, high urinary radioactivity from these primarily renally cleared compounds may obscure tumors in the prostate and peri-ureteric regions. We conducted the first intra-patient comparator study to assess the urinary radioactivity of two 18 F-labelled PSMA-PET radiopharmaceuticals, 18 F-piflufolastat and 18 F-flotufolastat. Methods: This multicenter, prospective, intra-patient comparator study (NCT06604442) enrolled men ≥ 18 years with low PSA (≤ 0.5 ng/mL) biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer ≥ 6 months after radical prostatectomy with undetectable PSA post-surgery, scheduled for a standard-of-care (SoC) 18 F-piflufolastat PET. Patients had a SoC PET/CT after IV 18 F-piflufolastat (target dose 333 MBq), and a second PET/CT 1–10 days later after IV 18 F-flotufolastat (target dose 296 MBq), both scans started approximately 60 min after administration and used the same scanner. The primary endpoint was the difference in urinary bladder radioactivity (mean standardized uptake value [SUV mean ]) between 18 F-piflufolastat PET and 18 F-flotufolastat PET. Secondary endpoints included patient and region-level detection rates (DR) for each radiopharmaceutical. Images were interpreted by two blinded central readers, with a third to resolve disagreements, allowing majority read results. Results: Between Oct 2024 and Jun 2025, 55 patients (mean PSA, 0.28 [range 0.09–0.50] ng/mL) were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Median bladder SUV mean was significantly higher with 18 F-piflufolastat (29.0; interquartile range [IQR], 18.9–40.8) than 18 F-flotufolastat (10.9; IQR, 6.0–18.5) with a median difference of 15.1 (IQR, 8.5–27.0; p<0.001 [Wilcoxon signed-rank test]). The patient-level DR was 27.3% (15/55) for 18 F-piflufolastat and 45.5% (25/55) for 18 F-flotufolastat (majority read). Among the 21 patients with very low PSA levels (≤ 0.2 ng/mL), 38.1% had a positive 18 F-piflufolastat scan compared with 52.4% for 18 F-flotufolastat scans (majority read). Regional and sub-regional DRs are shown in the table. Conclusions: In this intra-patient study, 18 F-flotufolastat showed significantly lower urinary radioactivity, and a higher overall DR than 18 F-piflufolastat indicating it may offer improved image assessment in regions close to the bladder. Clinical trial information: NCT06604442 . Region 18 F-Piflufolastat DR* n (%)N=55 18 F-Flotufolastat DR*n (%)N=55 Prostate bed 6 (10.9) 10 (18.2) Vesicourethral anastomosis 1 (1.8) 4 (7.3) Retrovesical 2 (3.6) 2 (3.6) Remnant seminal vesicles/ lateral surgical margin 2 (3.6) 4 (7.3) Pelvic lymph nodes 8 (14.5) 9 (16.4) Majority read. *≥ 1 PET positive lesion.
Trial Design and Objectives for Patients With Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4
PURPOSE The continuous development of new imaging approaches, molecular phenotyping, genetic subtypes, prognosis assessments, and effective therapies across a range of disease states has created a need to redefine terminology and best practices for clinical trial conduct in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Methods We convened an international expert committee of diverse working groups, the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4 (PCWG4), between 2016 and 2025. Our objective was to formulate updated criteria based on emerging evidence and clinical trial data in a biomarker context to provide guidance for clinical trial design, eligibility, and end point assessments for patients with advanced prostate cancer. RESULTS PCWG4 redefines terminology around the disease state and previous therapies in a patient-centric context and terminology focused on androgen pathway modulation. We consider imaging, with a particular focus on positron emission tomography (PET)–defined disease. New recommendations are provided for disease state terminology, defining eligibility criteria, response and delay/prevent end points, intervals for reassessments including imaging, and patient-reported outcome determination. We provide recommendations in a biomarker-based context of use for the intended indication, reflective of patient benefit for specific interventions. We emphasize the need for development of validated PET imaging and molecular and phenotypic criteria as well as trial designs to appropriately risk stratify patients, predict and assess benefit, and measure post-treatment outcomes reliably in a trial framework. CONCLUSION PCWG4 updates recommendations on patient and tumor characterization, therapy development, and imaging criteria and extends guidance into earlier androgen pathway modulator–naïve/sensitive disease states to reflect an evolving, heterogeneous, and diverse patient population to optimize treatment benefits for all patients.
Correlative Biomarker Analysis of PSMA Expression on CTCs and PSMA Imaging in a Phase I Study of PSMA-Targeted Tubulysin Conjugate EC1169
Abstract Purpose: Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)–directed therapies provide meaningful clinical benefit in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), yet responses remain limited, underscoring the need for additional biomarkers of PSMA expression heterogeneity. In this study, we explored the relationship between PSMA imaging and PSMA expression on circulating tumor cells (CTC) in our early-phase trial using a PSMA-targeted small molecule. Experimental Design: This phase I study investigated EC1169, a small molecule conjugated to a tubulysin analog warhead, and 99mTc–EC0652, a PSMA imaging agent. Part A (dose escalation) identified the recommended phase II dose. Part B (dose expansion) assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) as its primary endpoint. We enrolled and treated 103 patients with mCRPC. Most part B patients underwent 99mTc–EC0652 PSMA imaging. A CTC assay assessed PSMA-positive CTCs and their association with response and PSMA imaging. Results: 99mTc–EC0652 single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging demonstrated increased sensitivity for detecting bone lesions compared with standard scans (computed tomography/bone scans). Using an optimized CTC assay, we observed that patients with a decrease in PSMA+ CTCs at baseline versus C3D1 displayed a longer rPFS (8 vs. 2.9 months; P = 0.04). Importantly, patients with predominantly PSMA-positive disease on 99mTc–EC0652 imaging also harbored PSMA-negative CTCs, with a subset displaying neuroendocrine prostate cancer–like morphology. Conclusions: Although EC1169 showed limited activity, CTC and imaging analyses showed significant heterogeneity in PSMA expression on CTCs in patients with predominantly PSMA-positive lesions on SPECT. Our study highlights the importance of assessing both PSMA-based CTC and imaging assays in future validation trials.