Subscribe to RSS
Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.
https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00050348.xml
CC BY 4.0 · Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2023; 44(01): 130-137
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1759517
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1759517
Review Article
Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Prostate Cancer
Abstract
The Prostate Carcinoma Guidelines Panel have formulated these guidelines to assist medical professionals in the evidence-based management of prostate cancer. These have been formulated by a panel consisting of Indian multidisciplinary group of radiologists, uro-oncologists, urologists, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, and pathologists. These recommendations present the best evidence available to the clinicians; however, using these recommendations will not always result in the best outcome. They aid in decision making for individual patients; however, these will never replace clinical expertise when making treatment decisions. Taking personal values and preferences or individual circumstances of patients into account is necessary for final treatment decision. Guidelines are not mandatory and should not to be referred as a legal standard of care.
Keywords
mpMRI prostate - prostate cancer - prostate cancer imaging guidelines - prostate cancer imaging recommendations - PSMAPETCT - PSMAPETMRIPublication History
Article published online:
06 March 2023
© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 https://gco.iarc.fr/today
- 2 Panigrahi GK, Praharaj PP, Kittaka H. et al. Exosome proteomic analyses identify inflammatory phenotype and novel biomarkers in African American prostate cancer patients. Cancer Med 2019; 8 (03) 1110-1123 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1885.
- 3 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL. et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71 (03) 209-249 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660.
- 4 Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Colditz GA. et al. A prospective study of dietary fat and risk of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85 (19) 1571-1579 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/85.19.1571.
- 5 Kolonel LN, Nomura AM, Cooney RV. Dietary fat and prostate cancer: current status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91 (05) 414-428 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/91.5.414.
- 6 Willis MS, Wians FH. The role of nutrition in preventing prostate cancer: a review of the proposed mechanism of action of various dietary substances. Clin Chim Acta 2003; 330 (1-2): 57-83 DOI: 10.1016/S0009-8981(03)00048-2.
- 7 Perdana NR, Mochtar CA, Umbas R, Hamid AR. The Risk Factors of Prostate Cancer and Its Prevention: A Literature Review. Acta Med Indones 2016; 48 (03) 228-238
- 8 Rawla P. Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer. World J Oncol 2019; 10 (02) 63-89 DOI: 10.14740/wjon1191.
- 9 Richie JP, Catalona WJ, Ahmann FR. et al. Effect of patient age on early detection of prostate cancer with serum prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination. Urology 1993; 42 (04) 365-374 DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(93)90359-i.
- 10 Semjonow A, Brandt B, Oberpenning F, Roth S, Hertle L. Discordance of assay methods creates pitfalls for the interpretation of prostate-specific antigen values. Prostate Suppl 1996; 7: 3-16
- 11 D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB. et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280 (11) 969-974 DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.11.969.
- 12 Ilic D, Neuberger MM, Djulbegovic M, Dahm P. Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (01) CD004720 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004720.pub3.
- 13 Martin RM, Donovan JL, Turner EL. et al; CAP Trial Group. Effect of a Low-Intensity PSA-Based Screening Intervention on Prostate Cancer Mortality: The CAP Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2018; 319 (09) 883-895 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.0154.
- 14 Lopes PM, Sepúlveda L, Ramos R, Sousa P. The role of transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: new contributions. Radiol Bras 2015; 48 (01) 7-11 DOI: 10.1590/0100-3984.2013.0010.
- 15 Xiang J, Yan H, Li J, Wang X, Chen H, Zheng X. Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 2019; 17 (01) 31 DOI: 10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0.
- 16 Smeenge M, Barentsz J, Cosgrove D. et al. Role of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Consensus Panel. BJU Int 2012; 110 (07) 942-948
- 17 Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R. et al; MRI-FIRST Investigators. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 2019; 20 (01) 100-109 DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-2.
- 18 Bratan F, Niaf E, Melodelima C. et al. Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. Eur Radiol 2013; 23 (07) 2019-2029 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2795-0.
- 19 Roobol MJ, Steyerberg EW, Kranse R. et al. A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2010; 57 (01) 79-85 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.08.025.
- 20 Drost FH, Osses DF, Nieboer D. et al. Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 4 (04) CD012663 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012663.pub2.
- 21 Ericson KJ, Wenger HC, Rosen AM. et al. Prostate cancer detection following diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. Can J Urol 2017; 24 (02) 8714-8720
- 22 Al-Hussain TO, Epstein JI. Initial high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with carcinoma on subsequent prostate needle biopsy: findings at radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol 2011; 35 (08) 1165-1167 DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182206da8.
- 23 Srigley JR, Merrimen JL, Jones G, Jamal M. Multifocal high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is still a significant risk factor for adenocarcinoma. Can Urol Assoc J 2010; 4 (06) 434 DOI: 10.5489/cuaj/1068.
- 24 Kronz JD, Shaikh AA, Epstein JI. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with adjacent small atypical glands on prostate biopsy. Hum Pathol 2001; 32 (04) 389-395 DOI: 10.1053/hupa.2001.23522.
- 25 Szentirmai E, Giannico GA. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate. Pathologica 2020; 112 (01) 17-24 DOI: 10.32074/1591-951X-5-20.
- 26 Huang G, Lebovic G, Vlachou PA. Diagnostic Value of CT in Detecting Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 213 (04) 831-835 DOI: 10.2214/AJR.18.21013.
- 27 Li R, Ravizzini GC, Gorin MA. et al. The use of PET/CT in prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2018; 21 (01) 4-21 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-017-0007-8.
- 28 Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K. et al. Simultaneous 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI Improves the Localization of Primary Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2016; 70 (05) 829-836 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.053.
- 29 Roach PJ. et al. The Impact of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT on Management Intent in Prostate Cancer.
- 30 Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ. et al; proPSMA Study Group Collaborators. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet 2020; 395 (10231): 1208-1216 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7.
- 31 Roach PJ, Francis R, Emmett L. et al. The Impact of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT on Management Intent in Prostate Cancer: Results of an Australian Prospective Multicenter Study. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (01) 82-88
- 32 Buyyounouski MK, Choyke PL, McKenney JK. et al. Prostate cancer - major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67 (03) 245-253 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21391.
- 33 Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Severens JL. Patient selection for magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2001; 40 (03) 300-307 DOI: 10.1159/000049790.
- 34 Hövels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM. et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 2008; 63 (04) 387-395 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2007.05.022.
- 35 Budiharto T, Joniau S, Lerut E. et al. Prospective evaluation of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the nodal staging of prostate cancer with a high risk of lymph node metastases. Eur Urol 2011; 60 (01) 125-130 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.01.015.
- 36 Tulsyan S, Das CJ, Tripathi M, Seth A, Kumar R, Bal C. Comparison of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and multiparametric MRI for staging of high-risk prostate cancer68Ga-PSMA PET and MRI in prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2017; 38 (12) 1094-1102 DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000749.
- 37 De Visschere PJL, Standaert C, Fütterer JJ. et al. A Systematic Review on the Role of Imaging in Early Recurrent Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 2 (01) 47-76 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.09.010.
- 38 Zhou J, Gou Z, Wu R, Yuan Y, Yu G, Zhao Y. Comparison of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol 2019; 48 (12) 1915-1924 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-019-03230-z.