Cargando…

Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Background: Initial staging and assessment of treatment activity in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients is controversial. Indications for the various available imaging modalities are not well-established due to rapid advancements in imaging and treatment. Methods: We conducted a critical liter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Turpin, Anthony, Girard, Edwina, Baillet, Clio, Pasquier, David, Olivier, Jonathan, Villers, Arnauld, Puech, Philippe, Penel, Nicolas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7005012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32083008
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00055
_version_ 1783494840723439616
author Turpin, Anthony
Girard, Edwina
Baillet, Clio
Pasquier, David
Olivier, Jonathan
Villers, Arnauld
Puech, Philippe
Penel, Nicolas
author_facet Turpin, Anthony
Girard, Edwina
Baillet, Clio
Pasquier, David
Olivier, Jonathan
Villers, Arnauld
Puech, Philippe
Penel, Nicolas
author_sort Turpin, Anthony
collection PubMed
description Background: Initial staging and assessment of treatment activity in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients is controversial. Indications for the various available imaging modalities are not well-established due to rapid advancements in imaging and treatment. Methods: We conducted a critical literature review of the main imaging abnormalities that suggest a diagnosis of metastasis in localized and locally advanced PCa or in cases of biological relapse. We also assessed the role of the various imaging modalities available in routine clinical practice for the detection of metastases and response to treatment in metastatic PCa patients. Results: In published clinical trials, the most commonly used imaging modalities for the detection and evaluation of therapeutic response are bone scan, abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), and pelvic and bone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For the detection and follow-up of metastases during treatment, modern imaging techniques i.e., choline-positron emission tomography (PET), fluciclovine-PET, or Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET provide better sensitivity and specificity. This is particularly the case of fluciclovine-PET and PSMA-PET in cases of biochemical recurrence with low values of prostate specific antigen. Conclusions: In routine clinical practice, conventional imaging still have a role, and communication between imagers and clinicians should be encouraged. Present and future clinical trials should use modern imaging methods to clarify their usage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7005012
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70050122020-02-20 Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature Turpin, Anthony Girard, Edwina Baillet, Clio Pasquier, David Olivier, Jonathan Villers, Arnauld Puech, Philippe Penel, Nicolas Front Oncol Oncology Background: Initial staging and assessment of treatment activity in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) patients is controversial. Indications for the various available imaging modalities are not well-established due to rapid advancements in imaging and treatment. Methods: We conducted a critical literature review of the main imaging abnormalities that suggest a diagnosis of metastasis in localized and locally advanced PCa or in cases of biological relapse. We also assessed the role of the various imaging modalities available in routine clinical practice for the detection of metastases and response to treatment in metastatic PCa patients. Results: In published clinical trials, the most commonly used imaging modalities for the detection and evaluation of therapeutic response are bone scan, abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT), and pelvic and bone magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For the detection and follow-up of metastases during treatment, modern imaging techniques i.e., choline-positron emission tomography (PET), fluciclovine-PET, or Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET provide better sensitivity and specificity. This is particularly the case of fluciclovine-PET and PSMA-PET in cases of biochemical recurrence with low values of prostate specific antigen. Conclusions: In routine clinical practice, conventional imaging still have a role, and communication between imagers and clinicians should be encouraged. Present and future clinical trials should use modern imaging methods to clarify their usage. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7005012/ /pubmed/32083008 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00055 Text en Copyright © 2020 Turpin, Girard, Baillet, Pasquier, Olivier, Villers, Puech and Penel. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Turpin, Anthony
Girard, Edwina
Baillet, Clio
Pasquier, David
Olivier, Jonathan
Villers, Arnauld
Puech, Philippe
Penel, Nicolas
Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title_full Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title_fullStr Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title_full_unstemmed Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title_short Imaging for Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Review of the Literature
title_sort imaging for metastasis in prostate cancer: a review of the literature
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7005012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32083008
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00055
work_keys_str_mv AT turpinanthony imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT girardedwina imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT bailletclio imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT pasquierdavid imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT olivierjonathan imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT villersarnauld imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT puechphilippe imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature
AT penelnicolas imagingformetastasisinprostatecancerareviewoftheliterature