Is it time to redefine the Phoenix criterion for biochemical failure in the era of PSMA PET/CT?

P Prantik Das (University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, University of Nottingham, School of Medicine, Nottingham, United Kingdom) J Jun Hao Lim (Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom) R Rania Mohammed (University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, United Kingdom) V Vishnu Pillai (Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom) R Rajlakshmi Banerjee (Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, United Kingdom) H Hitesh Khuhar (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom) A Alison Richardson (University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, United Kingdom) S Sheyda Ashton (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom) N Nathan Spencer (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom) O Oaluwadamilola Aransiola (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom)

Abstract

319 Background: Biochemical recurrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) is traditionally defined by the Phoenix criterion (PSA rise ≥ 2 ng/ml above nadir). However, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT can identify recurrent or metastatic disease at much lower PSA levels. This study evaluated the detection rate and clinical relevance of PSMA PET/CT across varying PSA values in patients with PCa following curative-intent radiotherapy (RT). Methods: We retrospectively analysed 182 patients managed between January 2021 and December 2024 who received curative-intent RT for PCa. Clinical data included PSA at the time of imaging, Gleason score, disease distribution, and prior primary treatment. Results: Of 182 patients, 167 (91.7%) underwent PSMA PET/CT; 149 (81.8%) demonstrated PSMA-avid lesions indicating local recurrence and/or metastatic disease, while 18 (9.8%) had negative scans. Thirty patients (17.9%) did not meet the Phoenix criterion (PSA < 2 ng/ml) yet had positive PSMA findings. Of these, 20 (66%) had nodal metastases, 2 (6.6%) had local recurrence with nodal and bone metastases, 3 (10%) had nodal and bone disease, and one patient (3.3%) had local recurrence with visceral and/or bone metastases. No correlation was observed between Gleason score and PSMA positivity in this subgroup (Gleason 7 = 53.3%, Gleason 8 = 26.6%, Gleason 9 = 20%). A further 23 patients (15%) had PSA > 2 but < 3 ng/ml; 14 (60.8%) demonstrated nodal metastases, 7 (30.4%) bone metastases, 4 (17.3%) combined local/nodal/bone disease, and 2 (8.6%) visceral metastases. Most had higher-grade tumours (Gleason 9 in 39%). Eighteen patients (12%) had PSA > 3 but < 4 ng/ml; 6 (33.3%) had nodal metastases, 6 (33.3%) bone metastases, 3 (16.6%) nodal plus bone disease, and 2 (11.1%) visceral metastases. Within this group, 44.4% had Gleason 9 and 38.8% had Gleason 7 disease. Conclusions: PSMA PET/CT demonstrates high sensitivity for detecting recurrent and metastatic PCa even at PSA ≤ 4 ng/ml, identifying disease in over 40% of scanned patients. Detection of nodal and distant metastases below the Phoenix threshold challenges the current reliance on biochemical criteria to trigger imaging. Early PSMA PET/CT may enable prompt therapeutic intervention and improved clinical outcomes. Prospective studies are warranted for validation.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 7_suppl
Published March 01, 2026
Pages 319-319
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (10)

P

Prantik Das

University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, University of Nottingham, School of Medicine, Nottingham, United Kingdom

J

Jun Hao Lim

Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom

R

Rania Mohammed

University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, United Kingdom

V

Vishnu Pillai

Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom

R

Rajlakshmi Banerjee

Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, United Kingdom

H

Hitesh Khuhar

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

A

Alison Richardson

University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, United Kingdom

S

Sheyda Ashton

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

N

Nathan Spencer

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

O

Oaluwadamilola Aransiola

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom