REVIEWS  AN UPDATE ON MOLECULAR IMAGING OF PROSTATE CANCER (Part I) 

The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2012 August;56(4):321-30

Copyright © 2012 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Clinical and diagnostic assessment for therapeutic decisions in prostate cancer

Passoni N. M. ¹, Di Trapani E. ¹, Suardi N. ¹, Gallina A. ¹, Abdollah F. ¹, Bianchi M. ¹, Picchio M. ^{2, 3}, Giovacchini G. ², Messa C. ^{3, 4, 5}, Rigatti P. ¹, Montorsi F. ¹, Briganti A. ¹ ✉

¹ Department of Urology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; ² Department of Nuclear Medicine, Vita-Salute San RaffaeleUniveristy, Milan, Italy; ³ Institute for Bioimaging and Molecular Physiology National Research Council (IBFM-CMR), Milan, Italy; ⁴ Tecnomed Foundation, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; ⁵ Department of Nuclear Medicine, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy

Due to the heterogeneity of prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes, there is a need for individualized treatment plans based on clinical and cancer characteristics. Recent advances in sophisticated imaging modalities have improved the ability to stratify patients according to their risk of PCa diagnosis and progression. This, in turn, has positively influenced the clinical decision making process. However, there is also an overuse of diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of PCa patients. Baseline diagnostic and re-staging evaluations need to be indeed personalized, in order to maximize the results and reduce unnecessary, lengthy and costly procedures. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate current international guidelines in order to identify clinical and diagnostic markers that might help clinicians in the selection of the most appropriate imaging approach. For this aim, different imaging modalities were analyzed in patients with newly diagnosed PCa, focusing on local, nodal and distant staging. Every step of staging was taken into consideration based on patient individualized risk, as defined by routinely available clinical variables. Second, different imaging techniques were also reviewed in the context of relapse after primary treatment, highlighting their utility and impact in the clinical decision making process. This review focuses mainly on conventional established imaging techniques, with an eye also to novel approaches that still need to be validated on large patient series.