Prostate-specific membrane antigen and fibroblast activation protein distribution in prostate cancer: preliminary data on immunohistochemistry and PET imaging

• Published in: Annals of nuclear medicine Vol. 36; no. 3; pp. 293 - 301
• Main Authors: Kessel, Katharina, Seifert, Robert, Weckesser, Matthias, Boegemann, Martin, Huss, Sebastian, Kratochwil, Clemens, Haberkorn, Uwe, Giesel, Frederik, Rahbar, Kambiz
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Singapore Springer Singapore 01-03-2022; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Antigens; Biopsy; Fibroblast activation protein; Fibroblasts; Hyperplasia; Imaging; Immunohistochemistry; Lymph nodes; Lymphatic system; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Membranes; Metastases; Metastasis; Nuclear Medicine; Original; Original Article; Patients; Positron emission; Positron emission tomography; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy; Proteins; Radiology; Staining; Tomography; Tumors; PSMA; FAP; Prostate cancer; Fibroblast activation protein
• ISSN: 0914-7187; 1864-6433
• DOI: 10.1007/s12149-021-01702-8

Introduction
Fibroblast activation protein (FAP) has been recently presented as new imaging target for malignant diseases and offers high contrast to surrounding normal tissue. FAP tracer uptake has been reported in various tumor entities. The aim of this study was to compare FAP and Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression in primary prostate cancer employing histological analyses and PET imaging in two small patient collectives.
Methods
Two independent small patient collectives were included in this study. For cohort A, data of 5 prostate cancer patients and 3 patients with benign prostate hyperplasia were included. Patients with prostate cancer were initially referred for PSMA PET staging. Radical prostatectomy was performed in all patients and prostate specimen of patients and biopsies of healthy controls were available for further evaluation. Histological workup included HE and immunohistochemistry using PSMA Ab, FAP Ab. Cohort B consists of 6 Patients with diagnosed mCRPC and available PSMA as well as FAP PET.
Results
Patients with proven prostate cancer infiltration exhibited strong positivity for PSMA in both primary tumors and lymph node metastases while stainings for FAP were found positive in some cases, but not all (2/5). Controls with BPH presented moderate PSMA staining and in one case also with a positive FAP staining (1/3). PET imaging with FAP seemed to result in more precise results in case of low PSMA expression than PSMA-PET.
Conclusions
While PSMA staining intensity is a valid indicator of prostate cancer in both primary tumor and lymph node metastases, the expression of FAP seems to be heterogeneous but not necessarily linked to cancer-associated fibroblasts. It is also present in inflammation-associated myofibroblasts. Therefore, its ultimate role in prostate cancer diagnosis remains a subject of discussion.