Purpose: Targeted alpha therapy (TAT) is a promising treatment for micrometastatic and minimal residual cancer. We evaluated systemic α-radioimmunotherapy (α-RIT) of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) using the α-particle emitter 211 At-labeled to the anti-PSCA A11 minibody. A11 is specific for prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), a cell surface glycoprotein which is overexpressed in more than 90% of both localized prostate cancer and bone metastases.Methods: PC3-PSCA cells were implanted subcutaneously (s.c.) and intratibially (i.t) in nude mice. Efficacy of α-RIT (two fractions-14-day interval) was studied on s.c. macrotumors (0, 1.5 and 1.9 MBq) and on i.t. microtumors (~100-200 μm; 0, 0.8 or 1.5 MBq) by tumor-volume measurements. The injected activities for therapies were estimated from separate biodistribution and myelotoxicity studies.Results: Tumor targeting of 211 At-A11 was efficient and the effect on s.c. macrotumors was strong and dosedependent. At 6 weeks, the mean tumor volumes for the treated groups, compared with controls, were reduced by approximately 85%. The separate myelotoxicity study following one single fraction showed reduced white blood cells (WBC) for all treated groups on day 6 after treatment. For the 0.8 and 1.5 MBq, the WBC reductions were transient and followed by recovery at day 13. For 2.4 MBq, a clear toxicity was observed and the mice were sacrificed on day 7. In the long-term follow-up of the 0.8 and 1.5 MBq-groups, blood counts on day 252 were normal and no signs of radiotoxicity observed. Efficacy on i.t. microtumors was evaluated in two experiments. In experiment 1, the tumor-free fraction (TFF) was 95% for both treated groups and significantly different (p < 0.05) from the controls at a TFF of 66%). In experiment 2, the difference in TFF was smaller, 32% for the treated group versus 20% for the controls. However, the difference in microtumor volume in experiment 2 was highly significant, 0.010 ± 0.003 mm 3 versus 3.79 ± 1.24 mm 3 (treated versus controls, respectively), i.e., a 99.7% reduction (p < 0.001). The different outcome in experiment 1 and 2 is most likely due to differences in microtumor sizes at therapy, or higher tumor-take in experiment 2 (where more cells were implanted).