» Articles » PMID: 38256579

Application of Advanced Imaging to Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Management: A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Unanswered Questions

Overview
Journal J Clin Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2024 Jan 23
PMID 38256579
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Major advances in prostate cancer diagnosis, staging, and management have occurred over the past decade, largely due to our improved understanding of the technical aspects and clinical applications of advanced imaging, specifically magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-cancer-specific positron emission tomography (PET). Herein, we review the established utility of these important and exciting technologies, as well as areas of controversy and uncertainty that remain important areas for future study. There is strong evidence supporting the utility of MRI in guiding initial biopsy and assessing local disease. There is debate, however, regarding how to best use the imaging modality in risk stratification, treatment planning, and assessment of biochemical failure. Prostate-cancer-specific PET is a relatively new technology that provides great value to the evaluation of newly diagnosed, treated, and recurrent prostate cancer. However, its ideal use in treatment decision making, staging, recurrence detection, and surveillance necessitates further research. Continued study of both imaging modalities will allow for an improved understanding of their best utilization in improving cancer care.

Citing Articles

Editorial: PET/CT and MRI in prostate cancer.

Grizzi F, Taverna G Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1421542.

PMID: 38854714 PMC: 11157124. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1421542.


Innovative Drug Modalities for the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Capuozzo M, Santorsola M, Ianniello M, Ferrara F, Zovi A, Petrillo N Diseases. 2024; 12(5).

PMID: 38785742 PMC: 11119780. DOI: 10.3390/diseases12050087.

References
1.
Ball M, Partin A, Epstein J . Extent of extraprostatic extension independently influences biochemical recurrence-free survival: evidence for further pT3 subclassification. Urology. 2014; 85(1):161-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.025. View

2.
Soeterik T, van Melick H, Dijksman L, Biesma D, Witjes J, van Basten J . Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Should Be Preferred Over Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Local Staging and Disease Risk Classification. Urology. 2020; 147:205-212. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.089. View

3.
Fossati N, Scarcella S, Gandaglia G, Suardi N, Robesti D, Boeri L . Underestimation of Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography in Assessing Tumor Burden in Prostate Cancer Nodal Recurrence: Head-to-Head Comparison of Ga-PSMA and C-Choline in a Large, Multi-Institutional Series of Extended Salvage Lymph.... J Urol. 2020; 204(2):296-302. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000800. View

4.
Diaz A, Shakir N, George A, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, Rothwax J . Use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Urol Oncol. 2015; 33(5):202.e1-202.e7. PMC: 6663486. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.01.023. View

5.
Calais J, Ceci F, Eiber M, Hope T, Hofman M, Rischpler C . F-fluciclovine PET-CT and Ga-PSMA-11 PET-CT in patients with early biochemical recurrence after prostatectomy: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm, comparative imaging trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20(9):1286-1294. PMC: 7469487. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30415-2. View