Skip to main content
Latest news
Browse specialties
Breast cancer Genitourinary cancers Lung & thoracic cancers
In focus
Next-generation sequencing: Emerging biomarkers in thyroid and NSCLCs ctDNA and bladder cancer: Current understanding and beyond ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC NSCLC driver mutations: Discussing the importance of RET, ALK and ROS1 alterations in NSCLC Early-stage NSCLC management: Surgery, targeted treatment and immunotherapy ALK fusion-positive NSCLC: International approaches to management RET fusion-positive NSCLC: Informing on the use of pralsetinib for patients with RET fusion-positive, advanced NSCLC COVID-19 & cancer
Conferences
SABCS 2022 ESMO 2022 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
About us
Medicine Matters Oncology
EXTENDED SEARCH
Top

17-07-2017 | Bladder cancer | Article

Advances in Imaging in Prostate and Bladder Cancer

Journal: Current Urology Reports

Authors: Abhishek Srivastava, Laura M. Douglass, Victoria Chernyak, Kara L. Watts

Publisher: Springer US

Login to get access

Abstract

Recent advancements in urologic imaging techniques aim to improve the initial detection of urologic malignancies and subsequent recurrence and to more accurately stage disease. This allows the urologist to make better informed treatment decisions. In particular, exciting advances in the imaging of prostate cancer and bladder cancer have recently emerged including the use of dynamic, functional imaging with MRI and PET. In this review, we will explore these imaging modalities, in addition to new sonography techniques and CT, and how they hope to improve the diagnosis and management of prostate and bladder cancer.
Literature
1.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(1):7–30.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Harvey CJ, et al. Applications of transrectal ultrasound in prostate cancer. Br J Radiol. 2012;85 Spec No 1:S3–17.
3.
•• Ahmed HU, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389(10071):815–22. First and largest trial presenting level 1b data evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of MP-MRI vs. TRUS against transperinal saturation biopsy.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Halpern EJ, Rosenberg M, Gomella LG. Prostate cancer: contrast-enhanced us for detection. Radiology. 2001;219(1):219–25.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Linden RA, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound flash replenishment method for directed prostate biopsies. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2354–8.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Xie SW, et al. Influence of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate volume, and PSA density on prostate cancer detection with contrast-enhanced sonography using contrast-tuned imaging technology. J Ultrasound Med. 2013;32(5):741–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Halpern EJ, et al. Contrast enhanced transrectal ultrasound for the detection of prostate cancer: a randomized, double-blind trial of dutasteride pretreatment. J Urol. 2012;188(5):1739–45.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Xie SW, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with contrast-tuned imaging technology for the detection of prostate cancer: comparison with conventional ultrasonography. BJU Int. 2012;109(11):1620–6.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Sano F, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of the prostate: various imaging findings that indicate prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2011;107(9):1404–10.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Li Y, et al. Diagnostic performance of contrast enhanced ultrasound in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Acad Radiol. 2013;20(2):156–64.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Cornelis F, et al. Real-time contrast-enhanced transrectal US-guided prostate biopsy: diagnostic accuracy in men with previously negative biopsy results and positive MR imaging findings. Radiology. 2013;269(1):159–66.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Uemura H, et al. Usefulness of perflubutane microbubble-enhanced ultrasound in imaging and detection of prostate cancer: phase II multicenter clinical trial. World J Urol. 2013;31(5):1123–8.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ophir J, et al. Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging. 1991;13(2):111–34.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Salomon G, et al. Evaluation of prostate cancer detection with ultrasound real-time elastography: a comparison with step section pathological analysis after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;54(6):1354–62.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zhu Y, et al. Prostate cancer detection with real-time elastography using a bi-plane transducer: comparison with step section radical prostatectomy pathology. World J Urol. 2014;32(2):329–33.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Pallwein L, et al. Sonoelastography of the prostate: comparison with systematic biopsy findings in 492 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2008;65(2):304–10.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Konig K, et al. Initial experiences with real-time elastography guided biopsies of the prostate. J Urol. 2005;174(1):115–7.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Salomon G, et al. Incremental detection rate of prostate cancer by real-time elastography targeted biopsies in combination with a conventional 10-core biopsy in 1024 consecutive patients. BJU Int. 2014;113(4):548–53.CrossRefPubMed
19.
• Weinreb JC, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2016;69(1):16–40. Updated PI-RADS—guidelines based on expert consensus of the international working group on prostate cancer. CrossRefPubMed
20.
Bratan F, et al. How accurate is multiparametric MR imaging in evaluation of prostate cancer volume? Radiology. 2015;275(1):144–54.CrossRefPubMed
21.
• Woo S, et al. Diagnostic performance of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the diagnostic performance of PI-RADSv2 for the detection of PCa.
22.
Itatani R, et al. Negative predictive value of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: outcome of 5-year follow-up in men with negative findings on initial MRI studies. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(10):1740–5.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Abd-Alazeez M, et al. The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level—can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol. 2014;32(1):45.e17–22.CrossRef
24.
Seo JW, et al. PI-RADS Version 2: detection of clinically significant cancer in patients with biopsy gleason score 6 prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017:W1–w9.
25.
• Schoots IG, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2015;68(3):438–50. A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence regarding the diagnostic benefits of MRI-Targeted biopsy versus TRUS-Biopsy.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Lecouvet FE, et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol. 2012;62(1):68–75.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Robertson NL, et al.. Combined whole body and multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging as a 1-step approach to the simultaneous assessment of local recurrence and metastatic disease after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2017.
28.
Nelson SJ, et al. Metabolic imaging of patients with prostate cancer using hyperpolarized [1-(1)(3)C]pyruvate. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5(198):198ra108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Minamimoto R, et al. The potential of FDG-PET/CT for detecting prostate cancer in patients with an elevated serum PSA level. Ann Nucl Med. 2011;25(1):21–7.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Brown AM, et al. Does focal incidental 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake in the prostate have significance? Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(8):3222–9.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Jadvar H. Is there use for FDG-PET in prostate cancer? Semin Nucl Med. 2016;46(6):502–6.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Jadvar H, et al. Baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters as imaging biomarkers of overall survival in castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(8):1195–201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Bouchelouche K, et al. Imaging prostate cancer: an update on positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Urol Rep. 2010;11(3):180–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
• Evangelista L, et al. Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2013;63(6):1040–8. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating choline PET/CT for lymph node staging of PCa CrossRefPubMed
35.
• Evangelista L, et al. Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38(5):305–14. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating choline PET/CT in detection of locoregional or distant metastases in PCa. CrossRefPubMed
36.
• Mohsen B, et al. Application of C-11-acetate positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging in prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. BJU Int. 2013;112(8):1062–72. A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating C-acetate PET/CT imaging in PCa.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Bouchelouche K, Choyke PL, Capala J. Prostate specific membrane antigen- a target for imaging and therapy with radionuclides. Discov Med. 2010;9(44):55–61.PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(1):11–20.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems using a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(5):887–97.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Park H, et al. Introducing parametric fusion PET/MRI of primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(4):546–51.CrossRefPubMed
41.
American Cancer Society. Key statistics for bladder cancer. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2017.
42.
Herr HW. Quality control in transurethral resection of bladder tumours. BJU Int. 2008;102(9 pt b):1242–6.CrossRefPubMed
43.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Guidelines: Bladder Cancer. Fort Washington: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2017.
44.
Mitterberger M. Three-dimensional ultrasonography of the urinary bladder: preliminary experience of assessment in patients with haematuria. BJU Int. 2007;99(1):111–6.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Kocakoc E. Detection of bladder tumors with 3-dimensional sonography and virtual sonographic cystoscopy. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27(1):45–53.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Gupta VG. Contrast enhanced ultrasound in urothelial carcinoma of urinary bladder: an underutilized staging and grading modality. Cen Eur J Urol. 2016;69(4):360–5.
47.
Li QY. Clinical utility of three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differentiation between noninvasive and invasive neoplasms of urinary bladder. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(11):2936–42.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Alfred Witjes J. Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):462–75.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Schmid SC. Prognostic value of computed tomography before radical cystectomy in patients with invasive bladder cancer: imaging predicts survival. World J Urol. 2016;34(4):569–76.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Barentsz JO. Primary staging of urinary bladder carcinoma: the role of MRI and a comparison with CT. Eur Radiol. 1996;6(2):129–33.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Sevcenco S. Prospective evaluation of diffusion-weighted MRI of the bladder as a biomarker for prediction of bladder cancer aggressiveness. Urol Oncol. 2014;32(8):1166–71.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Lee M.. Non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging for bladder cancer: fused high b value diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted imaging helps evaluate depth of invasion. Eur Radiol., 2017.
53.
Panebianco, V.. An evaluation of morphological and functional multi-parametric MRI sequences in classifying non-muscle and muscle invasive bladder cancer. Eur Radiol. 2017.
54.
Papalia R. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in patients selected for radical cystectomy: detection rate of pelvic lymph node metastases. BJU Int. 2012;109(7):1031–6.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Nguyen HT. Prediction of chemotherapeutic response in bladder cancer using K-means clustering of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41(5):1374–82.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Hafeez S. Advances in bladder cancer imaging. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
57.
Sharma A. Utility of early dynamic and delayed post-diuretic (18)F-FDG PET/CT SUVmax in predicting tumour grade and T-stage of urinary bladder carcinoma: results from a prospective single centre study. Br J Radiol. 2017;90(1072):20160787.CrossRefPubMed
58.
Lu Y. Clinical value of FDG PET or PET/CT in urinary bladder cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(9):2411–6.CrossRefPubMed
59.
• Soubra A. The diagnostic accuracy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography in staging bladder cancer: a single-institution study and a systematic review with meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2016;34(9):1229–37. This is the most recent systematic review and meta-analysis of PET-CT for staging of bladder cancer. CrossRefPubMed
60.
Jeong IG. FDG PET-CT for lymph node staging of bladder cancer: a prospective study of patients with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(9):3150–6.CrossRefPubMed
61.
Pichler, R.. Pelvic lymph node staging by combined (18)F-FDG-PET/CT imaging in bladder cancer prior to radical cystectomy. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2016.
62.
Picchio M. Value of 11C-choline PET and contrast-enhanced CT for staging of bladder cancer: correlation with histopathologic findings. J Nucl Med (1978). 2006;47(6):938–44.
63.
de Jong IJ. Visualisation of bladder cancer using (11)C-choline PET: first clinical experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29(10):1283–8.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Brunocilla E. Diagnostic accuracy of (11)C-choline PET/CT in preoperative lymph node staging of bladder cancer: a systematic comparison with contrast-enhanced CT and histologic findings. Clin Nucl Med. 2014;39(5):e308–12.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Graziani T. 11C-choline PET/CT for restaging of bladder cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(1):e1–5.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Maurer T. Diagnostic efficacy of [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional computed tomography in lymph node staging of patients with bladder cancer prior to radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;61(5):1031–8.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Brendle CBC. Simultaneously acquired MR/PET images compared with sequential MR/PET and PET/CT: alignment quality. Radiology. 2013;268(1):190–9.CrossRefPubMed
68.
Rosenkrantz AB. Comparison of coregistration accuracy of pelvic structures between sequential and simultaneous imaging during hybrid PET/MRI in patients with bladder cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(8):637–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
69.
• Rosenkrantz AB. Prospective pilot study to evaluate the incremental value of PET information in patients with bladder cancer undergoing 18F-FDG simultaneous PET/MRI. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42(1):e8–e15. Very recent prospective pilot study that showed benefit of PET-MRI as compared to MRI alone in identifying suspicious bladder and metastatic lesions. While preliminary, provides basis for continued research for the use of PET-MRI.CrossRefPubMed
  • » This content is intended only for healthcare providers and was made possible by educational funding provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Image Credits