Evidence Hub

Improving the Somatostatin Receptor Status Assessment for Personalized and Precise Management of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms with the Use of a 99mTc-Radiolabeled Somatostatin Receptor Antagonist: The Final Results of the ERA PerMed TECANT Clinical Trial

Hubalewska-Dydejczyk A, Decristoforo C, Mikolajczak R, Kolenc P, Opalinska M, Garnuszek P, Skorkiewicz K, Glowa B et al.

Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2026

Abstract

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms in which an adequate expression of a somatostatin receptor (SSTR) serves as a target for imaging and therapy, typically using SSTR agonists. In the past decade, research in the field of NENs has focused on SSTR antagonists because of their higher and more sustained binding to a target, which may expand current diagnostic and therapeutic options, especially in patients with lower SSTR expression. The aim of this study was to perform a first-in-human injection of a novel 99mTc-labeled SSTR type 2 antagonist to establish safety, pharmacokinetics, and first assessment of SSTR status in patients with NENs through a qualitative and quantitative comparison with 68Ga-SSTR PET as a reference standard. Methods: Patients with metastatic grade 1 or 2 NENs and proven SSTR expression in primary and metastatic lesions on SSTR PET were imaged after a first-in-human injection of [99mTc]Tc-TECANT1. Assessment of safety, pharmacokinetics, and dosimetry was performed as a primary endpoint, with comparison of diagnostic performance and quantification of uptake to SSTR PET as a secondary endpoint. Results: Ten patients were enrolled. [99mTc]Tc-TECANT1 was found to be safe, with favorable pharmacokinetics and dosimetry (average total body effective dose of 3.3 ± 0.7 mSv). The diagnostic performance in comparison to that of SSTR PET was found to be superior, with a comparable or a higher number of detected lesions and superior…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free