FAPI-CUP: A prospective cohort study of patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) to evaluate a novel radiotracer, fibroblast activated protein (FAPI), targeting cancer-associated fibroblasts for primary site detection.
Abstract
3072 Background: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) represents a heterogeneous group of metastatic tumours for which standardised diagnostic work-up fails to identify the site of origin at diagnosis. 18 F-FDG-PET/CT aids in identifying a putative primary site in ~30-50% of CUP patient (pts); however, has limited sensitivity for detecting cancers with high stromal content. Fibroblast activation protein (FAP) is a type II transmembrane serine protease and highly expressed by cancer-associated fibroblasts abundant in desmoplastic tumours such as CUP. 68 Ga-FAPI-46 is a FAP-targeting PET tracer but has not been directly compared to 18 F-FDG-PET/CT in CUP. Aims: We aimed to determine if the addition of 68 Ga-FAPI-46 detects more primary sites compared with 18 F-FDG-PET/CT and CT CAP (standard of care; SoC) in CUP pts and if there is an association between the level of FAPI avidity and response to systemic treatment. Methods: A prospective cohort study recruiting CUP pts across four sites in Australia. Key inclusion criteria: 1) pts considered CUP after diagnostic work-up, pathological review and gender appropriate tests; 2) adequate haematologic and organ function; 3) not commenced current line of systemic treatment (exception palliative radiotherapy for symptom control); 4) ECOG ≤ 2 and life expectancy > 3months. 5) ≤1 prior line of systemic treatment. Pts undergo SoC imaging (CT CAP, 18 F-FDG-PET/CT) and 68 Ga-FAPI-46 PET/CT scan which are reviewed at a multidisciplinary meeting to determine primary site. Clinicopathological review and genomic analysis (if available) were used to determine final primary site. Pts start systemic treatment and have SoC follow-up with data regarding RECIST 1.1 response, survival outcome and further lines of treatment for 12 months. Results: At interim analysis 60 pts were recruited from 03/2022 to 06/2025. Median age was 68 years [30-83] with 89% being ECOG 0-1 and 80% classified as having an unfavourable CUP subtype. A primary site was detected in 37/60 (62%) and 33/60 (55%) pts with 68 Ga-FAPI-46 PET/CT and SoC and SoC alone, respectively. Cholangiocarcinoma (9/37; 24%) and lung (7/37; 19%) were the commonest primary sites detected. 46/60 (77%) pts commenced systemic treatment with a best overall response rate of 9/38 (24%) in RECIST evaluable pts. There was no association between RECIST response and baseline FAPI avidity for either average SUVmax top 3 lesions (p=0.653) or highest SUVmax (p=0.416). Conclusions: 68 Ga-FAPI-46 PET/CT in addition to SoC detected a primary site in more patients compared to SoC imaging alone. There was no association between RECIST response and baseline FAPI avidity. Clinical trial information: NCT05263700 .
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (17)
Tharani Sivakumaran
Timothy J. Akhurst
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre; and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Grace Kong
Anthony Cardin
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging; and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Su-Faye Lee
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging; and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Leanne Pasanen
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Mathias Bressel
Peter Roselt
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Sidney Levy
Molecular Imaging and Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Imaging; and Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Zhen Siow
Department of Medical Oncology, Eastern Health, Box Hill VIC Australia; and Monash University, Eastern Health Clinical School, Box Hill VIC Australia, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Ian M. Collins
Mark Andrew Warren
Bendigo Health Oncology Department, Bendigo, Australia
Hui Li Wong
Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne VIC Australia and; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne VIC, Australia, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
David Bowtell
Richard Tothill
Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology and Collaborative Centre for Genomic Cancer Medicine, The University of Melbourne and Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Rodney John Hicks
Melbourne Theranostic Innovation Centre; The University of Melbourne Department of Medicine, St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Linda R. Mileshkin
Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia