Literature DB >> 12352409

Prognostic value of bone scan in patients with metastatic prostate cancer treated initially with androgen deprivation therapy.

Jérôme Rigaud1, Rabi Tiguert, Loïc Le Normand, Georges Karam, Pascal Glemain, Jean-Marie Buzelin, Olivier Bouchot.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We analyzed whether classifying bone prostate cancer metastases correlates with survival in patients treated primarily with androgen deprivation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 86 patients with bone metastases who were followed between September 1988 and September 1999. Only those treated initially with androgen deprivation as monotherapy were included in this study. Clinical, pathological and radiological information were obtained by patient chart review. The 86 patients were divided into 2 groups according to metastasis grade on bone scan at diagnosis. Group 1 included patients with metastases on the axial skeleton and group 2 included those with bone metastases on the appendicular skeleton. In addition to our classification, we stratified patients according to the Soloway and Crawford et al classifications, and analyzed survival.
RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in the groups with axial versus appendicular metastases in terms of patient age, biopsy Gleason score, serum prostate specific antigen or clinical stage. Median survival was 53 and 29 months in patients with axial and appendicular bone metastases, respectively. Those with axial disease had better survival than those with appendicular bone metastases (p = 0.048). No statistical difference was observed when grading bone scan according to the Soloway and Crawford et al classifications.
CONCLUSIONS: Classifying bone scans according to the site of metastases (axial versus appendicular) had many advantages. It is easy to understand and helps urologist better predict the patient prognosis. Axial metastases carries a better prognosis than appendicular metastasis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12352409     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000030900.55714.76

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  32 in total

1.  Comparison of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99mTc-DPD-SPECT/CT for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients: Additional value of morphologic information from low dose CT.

Authors:  Jan-Carlo Janssen; Sebastian Meißner; Nadine Woythal; Vikas Prasad; Winfried Brenner; Gerd Diederichs; Bernd Hamm; Marcus R Makowski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Bone scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging.

Authors:  Emilio Bombardieri; Cumali Aktolun; Richard P Baum; Angelika Bishof-Delaloye; John Buscombe; Jean François Chatal; Lorenzo Maffioli; Roy Moncayo; Luc Morteímans; Sven N Reske
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  [Radionuclide bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Clinical aspects and cost analysis].

Authors:  T Klatte; D Klatte; M Böhm; E P Allhoff
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Impact of Anatomic Location of Bone Metastases on Prognosis in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Alison R Roth; Stephanie A Harmon; Timothy G Perk; Jens Eickhoff; Peter L Choyke; Karen A Kurdziel; William L Dahut; Andrea B Apolo; Michael J Morris; Scott B Perlman; Glenn Liu; Robert Jeraj
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 2.872

5.  Time of metastatic disease presentation and volume of disease are prognostic for metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

Authors:  Edoardo Francini; Kathryn P Gray; Wanling Xie; Grace K Shaw; Loana Valença; Brandon Bernard; Laurence Albiges; Lauren C Harshman; Philip W Kantoff; Mary-Ellen Taplin; Cristopher J Sweeney
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2018-04-29       Impact factor: 4.104

Review 6.  Imaging of distant metastases of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Filippo Pesapane; Marcin Czarniecki; Matteo Basilio Suter; Baris Turkbey; Geert Villeirs
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 3.064

7.  Pathological sprouting of adult nociceptors in chronic prostate cancer-induced bone pain.

Authors:  Juan M Jimenez-Andrade; Aaron P Bloom; James I Stake; William G Mantyh; Reid N Taylor; Katie T Freeman; Joseph R Ghilardi; Michael A Kuskowski; Patrick W Mantyh
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 8.  Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Guohua Shen; Houfu Deng; Shuang Hu; Zhiyun Jia
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 9.  Validation and clinical utility of prostate cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  Howard I Scher; Michael J Morris; Steven Larson; Glenn Heller
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 10.  Functional imaging for prostate cancer: therapeutic implications.

Authors:  Carina Mari Aparici; Youngho Seo
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.446

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.