Even if most of a patient's cancer is PSMA-avid, the presence of small liver lesions that are *not* PSMA-avid is a major red flag. This can indicate a more aggressive, PSMA-negative biology that won't respond to PSMA-targeted therapy and may instead require alternative treatments like chemotherapy, complicating patient selection.
Related Insights
Standard guidelines for treating metastatic prostate cancer are based on conventional imaging (CT/bone scan). The panel argues that PSMA PET-positive biochemical recurrence represents a different, earlier disease state. This necessitates new treatment paradigms, like definitive therapy durations, not covered by current guidelines.
The effectiveness of radioligand therapy is counterintuitive: as tumors shrink and PSMA binding sites decrease, less radiation is delivered to the cancer. The VISION trial showed the first two doses delivered more radiation to the tumor than the subsequent four, questioning the value of a fixed, prolonged treatment schedule.
The advent of highly sensitive PSMA PET imaging identifies metastases in many patients previously considered to have only biochemical relapse (BCR). However, experts argue against a knee-jerk reaction to treat. Many of these patients, particularly those with slow PSA doubling times, can be safely observed, challenging the assumption that visible disease always requires immediate intervention.
Unlike traditional chemotherapy, radioligand therapy's toxicity may be inversely correlated with tumor volume. In low-burden disease, fewer cancer cells act as a 'sink' for the drug, potentially leading to higher radiation exposure and side effects in healthy, PSMA-expressing tissues like salivary glands.
An individual tumor can have hundreds of unique mutations, making it impossible to predict treatment response from a single genetic marker. This molecular chaos necessitates functional tests that measure a drug's actual effect on the patient's cells to determine the best therapy.
An NCI working group coined "PSMA positive BCR" to classify patients with biochemical relapse (BCR) who have findings on a modern PSMA PET scan. This formally recognizes this group is distinct from both conventionally-defined metastatic patients and traditional BCR patients, necessitating unique clinical trial designs and treatment strategies.
NCCN now recommends PSMA PET as a potential replacement for traditional CT, MRI, and bone scans for initial staging of higher-risk prostate cancer and detecting recurrence. This shift is based on PSMA PET's superior sensitivity and specificity for finding micrometastatic disease, positioning it as a more effective frontline tool.
Even when testing drugs in heavily pre-treated patients, clinical trials incorporate subtle biological selection criteria. For instance, the COMPASS trial excludes patients with visceral metastases, a tactic to enrich for a population more likely to respond and avoid the most aggressive disease subtypes.
Three 2025 trials (AMPLITUDE, PSMA-addition, CAPItello) introduced personalized therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. However, significant benefits were confined to narrow subgroups, like BRCA-mutated patients. This suggests future success depends on even more stringent patient selection, not broader application of targeted agents.
A critical limitation of PSMA PET is its inability to detect tumors that do not express the PSMA protein. In these cases, a patient may show extensive disease on a conventional bone scan that is entirely invisible on a PSMA PET scan, highlighting the risk of relying on a single imaging modality.