Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1.

Purpose: Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy. Results: The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC. Conclusions: CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 2.

Background: Management strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have rapidly shifted in recent years. As novel imaging and therapeutic approaches have made their way to the clinic, providers are encountering increasingly challenging clinical scenarios, with limited guidance from the current literature. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) is a multidisciplinary meeting of prostate cancer experts intended to address the many challenges of prostate cancer management. At the first annual USPCC meeting, areas of controversy and consensus were identified during a 2-day meeting that included expert presentations, full-panel discussions, and postdiscussion responses to questions developed by the USPCC cochairs and session moderators. Results: This narrative review covers the USPCC expert discussion and perspectives relevant to mCRPC, including neuroendocrine/aggressive-variant prostate cancer (NEPC/AVPC). Areas of broad agreement identified among USPCC experts include the benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, the use of radioligand therapy in patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive mCRPC, and the need for clinical trials that address real-world clinical questions, including the performance of novel therapies when compared with modern standard-of-care treatment. Ongoing areas of controversy and uncertainty included the appropriateness of PARP inhibitors in patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations, the optimal definition of PSMA positivity, and systemic therapies for patients with NEPC/AVPC after progression on platinum-based therapies. Conclusions: The first annual USPCC meeting identified several areas of controversy in the management of mCRPC, highlighting the urgent need for clinical trials designed to facilitate treatment selection and sequencing in this heterogeneous disease state.

PSMA PET/CT: joint EANM procedure guideline/SNMMI procedure standard for prostate cancer imaging 2.0.

Here we aim to provide updated guidance and standards for the indication, acquisition, and interpretation of PSMA PET/CT for prostate cancer imaging. Procedures and characteristics are reported for a variety of available PSMA small radioligands. Different scenarios for the clinical use of PSMA-ligand PET/CT are discussed. This document provides clinicians and technicians with the best available evidence, to support the implementation of PSMA PET/CT imaging in research and routine practice.

The Emerging Role of Next-Generation Imaging in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in men in developed countries and a leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Effective methods for diagnosing and staging PCa are necessary to guide treatment options in a personalized manner. The purpose of this paper is to review recent advances in molecular imaging and therapeutics and their expanding role in imaging and treating PCa. RECENT FINDINGS: Compared with conventional imaging, PSMA PET has proven more accurate at detecting PCa in patients with newly diagnosed PCa or biochemically recurrent PCa. PSMA PET can also induce management changes in patients due to its superior accuracy in detecting metastatic disease. Further research is necessary to understand the appropriate role of PSMA PET in patients with known metastatic PCa and the impact on clinical outcomes in patients who undergo treatment planning using findings from PSMA PET. We review the role of molecular imaging in primary and biochemically recurrent PCa. We find that molecular imaging is effective in detecting PCa and may lead to management changes.

Evolving understanding and categorization of prostate cancer: preventing progression to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: RADAR IV.

INTRODUCTION To interpret data and update the traditional categorization of prostate cancer in order to help treating clinicians make more informed decisions. These updates include guidance regarding how to best use next generation imaging (NGI) with the caveat that the new imaging technologies are still a work in progress. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature review. RESULTS: Critical goals in prostate cancer management include preventing or delaying emergence of distant metastases and progression to castration-resistant disease. Pathways for progression to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) involve transitional states: nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), and oligometastatic disease. Determination of clinical state depends in part on available imaging modalities. Currently, fluciclovine and gallium-68 (68Ga) prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) are the NGI approaches with the most favorable combination of availability, specificity, and sensitivity. PET imaging can be used to help guide treatment selection in most patients. NGI can help determine patients who are candidates for new treatments, most notably (next-generation androgen antagonists, eg, apalutamide, enzalutamide, darolutamide), that can delay progression to advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to achieve a consensus on new and more easily understood terminology to clearly and effectively describe prostate cancer and its progression to health care professionals and patients. It is also important that description of disease states make clear the need to initiate appropriate treatment. This may be particularly important for disease in transition to mCRPC.

Utility of Quantitative SPECT/CT Lymphoscintigraphy in Guiding Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Head and Neck Melanoma.

PURPOSE: To investigate the use of advanced SPECT/CT quantification in guiding surgical selection of positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in head and neck melanoma. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma who underwent lymphoscintigraphy with SPECT/CT prior to SLN biopsy (SLNB). Quantification of radiotracer uptake from SPECT/CT data was performed using in-house segmentation software. SLNs identified using SPECT/CT were compared to SLNs identified surgically using an intraoperative γ-probe. A radioactivity count threshold using SPECT/CT for detecting a positive SLN was calculated. RESULTS: One hundred and five patients were included. Median number of SLNs detected was 3/patient with SPECT/CT and 2/patient with intraoperative γ-probe. The hottest node identified by SPECT/CT and intraoperative γ-probe were identical in 85% of patients. All 20 histologically positive SLNs were identified by SPECT/CT and γ-probe. On follow-up, all nodal recurrences occurred at lymph node levels with the hottest node identified by SPECT/CT and either the hottest or second hottest node identified by γ-probe during SLNB. Using our data, a SPECT/CT radioactivity count threshold of 20% would eliminate the unnecessary removal of 11% of SPECT/CT identified nodes and 12% of intraoperatively detected nodes. CONCLUSION: Utilizing SPECT/CT quantification, we propose that a radioactivity count threshold can be developed to help guide the selective removal of lymph nodes in head and neck SLNB. Furthermore, the nodal level containing the hottest node identified by SPECT/CT quantification must be thoroughly investigated for SLNs and undergo careful follow-up and surveillance for recurrence.

A Clinician's Guide to Next Generation Imaging in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer (RADAR III).

PURPOSE: The advanced prostate cancer therapeutic landscape has changed dramatically in the last several years, resulting in improved overall survival of patients with castration naïve and castration resistant disease. The evolution and development of novel next generation imaging techniques will affect diagnostic and therapeutic decision making. Clinicians must navigate when and which next generation imaging techniques to use and how to adjust treatment strategies based on the results, often in the absence of correlative therapeutic data. Therefore, guidance is needed based on best available information and current clinical experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The RADAR (Radiographic Assessments for Detection of Advanced Recurrence) III Group convened to offer guidance on the use of next generation imaging to stage prostate cancer based on available data and clinical experience. The group also discussed the potential impact of next generation imaging on treatment options based on earlier detection of disease. RESULTS: The group unanimously agreed that progression to metastatic disease is a seminal event for patient treatment. Next generation imaging techniques are able to detect previously undetectable metastases, which could redefine the phases of prostate cancer progression. Thus, earlier systemic or locally directed treatment may positively alter patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The RADAR III Group recommends next generation imaging techniques in select patients in whom disease progression is suspected based on laboratory (biomarker) values, comorbidities and symptoms. Currently 18F-fluciclovine and 68Ga prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography are the next generation imaging agents with a favorable combination of availability, specificity and sensitivity. There is ongoing research of additional next generation imaging technologies, which may offer improved diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic options. As next generation imaging techniques evolve and presumably result in improved global accessibility, clinician ability to detect micrometastases may be enhanced for decision making and patient outcomes.

Diagnostic Accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT for Preoperative Lymph Node Staging in Newly Diagnosed Bladder Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIMS: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for preoperative lymph node (LN) staging in newly diagnosed bladder cancer (BC) patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database, from the earliest available date of indexing through June 30, 2017, were searched for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT for preoperative LN staging in newly diagnosed BC. We determined the sensitivities and specificities across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Across 14 studies (785 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.49-0.64) and the pooled specificity was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.87-0.95). The LR syntheses gave an overall LR+ of 7.4 (95% CI: 4.4-12.3) and an LR- of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.39-0.56). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 16 (95% CI: 9-28). CONCLUSIONS: F-18 FDG PET/CT shows a low sensitivity and high specificity for the detection of metastatic LNs in patients with newly diagnosed BC.

Diagnostic accuracy of C-11 choline and C-11 acetate for lymph node staging in patients with bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of C-11 choline and C-11 acetate positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for lymph node (LN) staging in bladder cancer (BC) patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library database, from the earliest available date of indexing through June 30, 2017, were searched for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of C-11 choline and C-11 acetate PET/CT for LN staging in BC. We determined the sensitivities and specificities across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Across 10 studies (282 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 0.66 (95% CI 0.54-0.75) without heterogeneity (χ2 = 12.4, p = 0.19) and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.76-0.95) with heterogeneity (χ2 = 29.1, p = 0.00). Likelihood ratio (LR) syntheses gave an overall positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 5.8 (95% CI 2.7-12.7) and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.39 (95% CI 0.28-0.53). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 15 (95% CI 6-38). In meta-regression analysis, the study design (prospective vs retrospective) was the source of the study heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: C-11 choline and C-11 acetate PET/CT shows a low sensitivity and moderate specificity for the detection of metastatic LNs in patients with BC. Moreover, heterogeneity among the studies should be considered a limitation. Further large multicenter studies would be necessary to substantiate the diagnostic accuracy of C-11 choline and C-11 acetate PET/CT for this purpose.