Comparison of 68Ga-DOTANOC and 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT Within Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

UNLABELLED: Somatostatin receptor PET tracers such as (68)Ga-DOTA,1-Nal(3)-octreotide ((68)Ga-DOTANOC) and (68)Ga-DOTA,Tyr(3)-octreotate ((68)Ga-DOTATATE) have shown promising results in patients with neuroendocrine tumors, with a higher lesion detection rate than is achieved with (18)F-fluorodihydroxyphenyl-l-alanine PET, somatostatin receptor SPECT, CT, or MR imaging. (68)Ga-DOTANOC has high affinity for somatostatin receptor subtypes 2, 3, and 5 (sst2,3,5). It has a wider receptor binding profile than (68)Ga-DOTATATE, which is sst2-selective. The wider receptor binding profile might be advantageous for imaging because neuroendocrine tumors express different subtypes of somatostatin receptors. The goal of this study was to prospectively compare (68)Ga-DOTANOC and (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT in the same patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) and to evaluate the clinical impact of (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT. METHODS: Eighteen patients with biopsy-proven GEP-NETs were evaluated with (68)Ga-DOTANOC and (68)Ga-DOTATATE using a randomized crossover design. Labeling of DOTANOC and DOTATATE with (68)Ga was standardized using a fully automated synthesis device. PET/CT findings were compared with 3-phase CT scans and in some patients with MR imaging, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, and histology. Uptake in organs and tumor lesions was quantified and compared by calculation of maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) using volume computer-assisted reading. RESULTS: Histology revealed low-grade GEP-NETs (G1) in 4 patients, intermediate grade (G2) in 7, and high grade (G3) in 7. (68)Ga-DOTANOC and (68)Ga-DOTATATE were false-negative in only 1 of 18 patients. In total, 248 lesions were confirmed by cross-sectional and PET imaging. The lesion-based sensitivity of (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET was 93.5%, compared with 85.5% for (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET (P = 0.005). The better performance of (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET is attributed mainly to the significantly higher detection rate of liver metastases rather than tumor differentiation grade. Multivariate analysis revealed significantly higher SUVmax in G1 tumors than in G3 tumors (P = 0.009). This finding was less pronounced with (68)Ga-DOTANOC (P > 0.001). Altogether, (68)Ga-DOTANOC changed treatment in 3 of 18 patients (17%). CONCLUSION: The sst2,3,5-specific radiotracer (68)Ga-DOTANOC detected significantly more lesions than the sst2-specific radiotracer (68)Ga-DOTATATE in our patients with GEP-NETs. The clinical relevance of this finding has to be proven in larger studies.