Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Targeted Prostate Biopsy and MR-Guided Therapy for Prostate Cancer.
Woodrum, David A; Kawashima, Akira; Gorny, Krzysztof R; Mynderse, Lance A.
Afiliación
  • Woodrum DA; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. woodrum.david@mayo.edu.
  • Kawashima A; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
  • Gorny KR; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Mynderse LA; Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Adv Exp Med Biol ; 1096: 159-184, 2018.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30324353
ABSTRACT
In 2018, the American Cancer Society (ACS) estimates that 164,690 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed and 29,430 will die due to the prostate cancer in the United States (Siegel et al., CA Cancer J Clin 677-30, 2018). Many men with prostate cancer are often managed with aggressive therapy including radiotherapy or surgery. No matter how expertly done, these therapies carry significant risk and morbidity to the patient's health related quality of life with impact on sexual, urinary and bowel function (Potosky et al., J Natl Cancer Inst 961358-1367, 2004). A recent meta-analysis of 19 studies reviewing the use of surgery and radiation for prostate cancer demonstrated patients who received radiation were more likely to die from their disease as compared to surgery (Wallis et al., Eur Urol 7021-30, 2016). Furthermore, screening programs using prostatic specific antigen (PSA) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided systematic biopsy have identified increasing numbers of low risk, low grade "localized" prostate cancer. This indolent nature of many prostate cancers presents a difficult decision of when to intervene given the possible comorbidities of aggressive treatment. Active surveillance has been increasingly instituted in order to balance cancer control versus treatment side effects (Jemal et al., CA Cancer J Clin 56106-130, 2006). Although active debate continues on the suitability of focal or regional therapy for these low or intermediate risk prostate cancer patients, many unresolved issues remain which complicate this approach of management. Some of the largest unresolved issues are prostate cancer multifocality, limitations of current biopsy strategies, suboptimal staging by accepted imaging modalities, less than robust prediction models for indolent prostate cancers and whether established curative therapies can be safely and effectively used following focal therapy for prostate cancer. In spite of these restrictions focal therapy continues to confront the current paradigm of therapy for low and even intermediate risk disease (Onik, Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 10149-158, 2017). It has been proposed that early detection and proper characterization may play a role in preventing the development of metastatic disease (Vickers et al., BMJ 346f2023, 2013). There is Level 1 evidence supporting detection and subsequent aggressive treatment of intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer (Bill-Axelson et al., N Engl J Med 370932-942, 2014). Therefore accurate assessment of cancer risk (i.e. grade and stage) using imaging and targeted biopsy is critical. Advances in prostate imaging with MRI have been accompanied with advances in MR guided therapy propelling prostate treatment solutions forward faster than ever.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Biopsia / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Adv Exp Med Biol Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Biopsia / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Adv Exp Med Biol Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos