Key result
CXCR4-directed imaging with 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT demonstrated higher tracer uptake in atherosclerotic lesions than 18F-FDG PET/CT (TBR 1.8 vs 1.4; P<0.01) and identified more lesions.
Why the study?
Pilot studies showed promise for 68Ga-pentixafor to noninvasively image atherosclerotic inflammation, but its performance compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT needed investigation.
Does 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT improve the identification of atherosclerotic lesions compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients undergoing oncologic staging?
Observational (n=92)
Blinded assessors
Does 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT improve the identification of atherosclerotic lesions compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients undergoing oncologic staging?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.8% vs 1.4%
p-value: p=<0.01
CXCR4-directed imaging with 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT identifies more atherosclerotic lesions and shows higher uptake than 18F-FDG PET/CT.
Should not yet change practice for lesion detection in oncology; leaves open whether CXCR4 PET improves atherosclerosis assessment.
C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) is expressed on the surface of various cell types involved in atherosclerosis, with a particularly rich receptor expression on macrophages and T cells. First pilot studies with ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor, a novel CXCR4-directed PET tracer, have shown promise to noninvasively image inflammation within atherosclerotic plaques. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the performance of ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor PET/CT for imaging atherosclerosis in comparison to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT. Methods: Ninety-two patients (37 women and 55 men; mean age, 62 ± 10 y) underwent ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for staging of oncologic diseases. In these subjects, lesions in the walls of large arteries were identified using morphologic and PET criteria for atherosclerosis (n = 652). Tracer uptake was measured and adjusted for vascular lumen (background) signal by calculation of target-to-background ratios (TBRs) by 2 investigators masked to the other PET scan. On a lesion-to-lesion and patient basis, the TBRs of both PET tracers were compared and additionally correlated to the degree of arterial calcification as quantified in CT. Results: On a lesion-to-lesion basis, ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor and ¹⁸F-FDG uptake showed a weak correlation (r = 0.28; P < 0.01). ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor PET identified more lesions (n = 290; TBR ≥ 1.6, P < 0.01) and demonstrated higher uptake than ¹⁸F-FDG PET (1.8 ± 0.5 vs. 1.4 ± 0.4; P < 0.01). The degree of plaque calcification correlated negatively with both ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor and ¹⁸F-FDG uptake (r = −0.38 vs. −0.31, both P < 0.00001). Conclusion: CXCR4-directed imaging of the arterial wall with ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor PET/CT identified more lesions than ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, with only a weak correlation between tracers. Further studies to elucidate the underlying biologic mechanisms and sources of CXCR4 positivity, and to investigate the clinical utility of chemokine receptor–directed imaging of atherosclerosis, are highly warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kircher et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Atherosclerosis (n=92). 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT vs. 18F-FDG PET/CT was evaluated on Tracer uptake (target-to-background ratio) in atherosclerotic lesions (p=<0.01). CXCR4-directed imaging with 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT demonstrated higher tracer uptake in atherosclerotic lesions than 18F-FDG PET/CT (TBR 1.8 vs 1.4; P<0.01) and identified more lesions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: