Prostat kanserinde moleküler görüntüleme ile evrelemenin vakti geldi mi?

Abstract

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men. After the diagnosis is made, staging should be undertaken with imaging methods in order to plan the treatment and predict the prognosis. Parallel to technological developments in recent years, new imaging methods have entered into clinical use. Among these methods, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging has come to the fore since it provides anatomical and functional imaging and has many advantages in tumor (T), nodal (N) and metastatic (M) staging. This review discusses the current status of the PSMA-PET method in prostate cancer staging.

Keywords

• Prostat kanseri
• evreleme
• pozitron emisyon tomografi

Is it time to stage prostate cancer using molecular imaging?

Abstract

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men. After the diagnosis is made, staging should be undertaken with imaging methods in order to plan the treatment and predict the prognosis. Parallel to technological developments in recent years, new imaging methods have entered into clinical use. Among these methods, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging has come to the fore Since it provides anatomical and functional imaging and has many advantages in tumor (T), nodal (N) and metastatic (M) staging. This review discusses the current status of the PSMA-PET method in prostate cancer staging.

Keywords

• Prostate cancer
• staging
• positron emission tomography

References

1. 1- Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492.
2. 2- Cooperberg MR, Pasta DJ, Elkin EP,et al. The University of California, San Francisco Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score: a straightforward and reliable preoperative predictor of disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173(6):1938-1942. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000158155.33890.e7.
3. 3- Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA; Grading Committee. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(2):244-252. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530.
4. 4- Ploussard G, Manceau C, Beauval JB, et al. Decreased accuracy of the prostate cancer EAU risk group classification in the era of imaging-guided diagnostic pathway: proposal for a new classification based on MRI-targeted biopsies and early oncologic outcomes after surgery. World J Urol. 2020;38(10):2493-2500. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-03053-6.
5. 5- Rajasekaran AK, Anilkumar G, Christiansen JJ. Is prostate-specific membrane antigen a multifunctional protein? Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2005;288(5):C975-81. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00506.2004.
6. 6- Banerjee SR, Pullambhatla M, Byun Y,et al. 68Ga-labeled inhibitors of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) for imaging prostate cancer. J Med Chem. 2010; 53(14):5333-5341. doi: 10.1021/jm100623e.
7. 7- Eder M, Schäfer M, Bauder-Wüst U,et al. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012;23(4):688-97. doi: 10.1021/bc200279b.
8. 8- Afshar-Oromieh A, Hetzheim H, Kratochwil C,et al. The TheranosticPSMA Ligand PSMA-617 in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer by PET/CT: Biodistribution in Humans, Radiation Dosimetry, and First Evaluation of Tumor Lesions. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(11):1697-1705. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.161299.

9. 9- Herrmann K, Bluemel C, Weineisen M,et al. Biodistribution and radiation dosimetry for a probe targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen for imaging and therapy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(6):855-861. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.115.156133.
10. 10- Filella X, Foj L. Novel Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer Detection and Prognosis. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1095:15-39. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-95693-0_2.
11. 11- CatalonaWJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR,et al. Comparison of Digital Rectal Examination and Serum Prostate Specific Antigen in the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Clinical Trial of 6,630 Men. J Urol. 2017;197(2S):S200-S207. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.073.
12. 12- Varma M, Cochlin D, Delahunt B, et al. TNM clinical staging of prostate cancer: issues and solutions. BJU Int. 2019;123(3):382-384. doi: 10.1111/bju.14589.
13. 13- Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E,et al. Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol. 2015 Mar;67(3):569-76. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.079.
14. 14- Lopci E, Lughezzani G, Castello A, et al. Prospective Evaluation of 68Ga-labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Primary Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. Eur Urol Focus. 2020:S2405-4569(20)30092-4. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.03.004.
15. 15- Hirmas N, Al-Ibraheem A, Herrmann K, et al. [68Ga]PSMA PET/CT Improves Initial Staging and Management Plan of Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2019;21(3):574-581. doi: 10.1007/s11307-018-1278-8.
16. 16- Nandurkar R, vanLeeuwen P, Stricker P, et al. 68Ga-HBEDD PSMA-11 PET/CT staging prior to radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients: Diagnostic and predictive value for the biochemical response to surgery. Br J Radiol. 2019;92(1095):20180667. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20180667.
17. 17- Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol. 2012;61(3):480-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.044.
18. 18- Cimino S, Reale G, Castelli T, et al. Comparison between Briganti, Partin and MSKCC tools in predicting positive lymph nodes in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Urol. 2017;51(5):345-350. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1332680.
19. 19- Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, et al. Diagnostic Efficacy of (68)Gallium-PSMA Positron Emission Tomography Compared to Conventional Imaging for Lymph Node Staging of 130 Consecutive Patients with Intermediate to High Risk Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2016;195(5):1436-1443. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.025.
20. 20- Kim SJ, Lee SW, Ha HK. Diagnostic Performance of Radiolabeled Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Primary Lymph Node Staging in Newly Diagnosed Intermediate to High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urol Int. 2019;102(1):27-36. doi: 10.1159/000493169.
21. 21- Budäus L, Leyh-Bannurah SR, Salomon G, et al. Initial Experience of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT Imaging in High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Prior to Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):393-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.010.
22. 22- Muteganya R, Goldman S, Aoun F, Roumeguère T, Albisinni S. Current Imaging Techniques for Lymph Node Staging in Prostate Cancer: A Review. Front Surg. 2018 Dec 7;5:74. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2018.00074.
23. 23- Öbek C, Doğanca T, Demirci E, et al. Members of Urooncology Association, Turkey. The accuracy of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in primary lymph node staging in high-risk prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44(11):1806-1812. doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3752-y.
24. 24- Petersen LJ, Strandberg J, Stenholt L, Johansen MB, Zacho HD. Reporting and Handling of Indeterminate Bone Scan Results in the Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2018;8(1):9. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics8010009.
25. 25- Schmidt-Hegemann NS, Fendler WP, Buchner A, et al. Detection level and pattern of positive lesions using PSMA PET/CT for staging prior to radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol. 2017;12(1):176. doi: 10.1186/s13014-017-0902-0.
26. 26- WeilbaecherKN, Guise TA, McCauley LK. Cancer to bone: a fatal attraction. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;11(6):411-25. doi: 10.1038/nrc3055.
27. 27- Høilund-Carlsen PF, Hess S, Werner TJ, Alavi A. Cancer metastasizes to the bone marrow and not to the bone: time for a paradigm shift! Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(6):893-897. doi: 10.1007/s00259-018-3959-6.
28. 28- 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.
29. 29- Moore C. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT before radical treatment. Lancet. 2020 Apr 11;395(10231):1170-1172. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30527-4.
30. 30- Hofman MS, Violet J, Hicks RJ, et al. [177Lu]-PSMA-617 radionuclide treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (LuPSMA trial): a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(6):825-833. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30198-0.
31. 31- Rahbar K, Bodei L, Morris MJ. Is the Vision of Radioligand Therapy for Prostate Cancer Becoming a Reality? An Overview of the Phase III VISION Trial and Its Importance for the Future of Theranostics. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(11):1504-1506. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.119.234054.