Literature DB >> 21304009

Changing the referral criteria for bone scan in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients.

C McArthur1, G McLaughlin, R N Meddings.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to correlate the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and Gleason score with staging bone scan result in patients with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer in order to establish the feasibility of implementing the European Association Urology guidelines, which state that a bone scan may not be indicated when PSA <20 in well-moderately differentiated tumours.
METHODS: We identified 633 patients retrospectively and 186 patients prospectively with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer undergoing a staging bone scan between March 2005 and January 2010. Patients were excluded if there was no Gleason score available or if the PSA level was checked over 3 months prior to bone scan. Bone scan results were analysed with respect to age, PSA level and Gleason score. In the case of an equivocal result, subsequent imaging was taken into consideration or the initial bone scan was re-reviewed. In persistently equivocal cases, all relevant imaging was assessed by a blinded panel of radiologists to allow a final decision to be made.
RESULTS: Of 672 patients aged 39-93 years (median 71 years), who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 54 (8%) had evidence of bony metastases. PSA level and Gleason score were both independent predictors of bone scan positivity and their predictive value was additive p<0.01. None of the 357 patients with a PSA level of <20 and a Gleason score of <8 had a positive bone scan.
CONCLUSION: Staging bone scans in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients with a PSA level of <20 and a Gleason score of <8 can be safely omitted, with these criteria having a negative predictive value of 100% in our series.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21304009      PMCID: PMC3486676          DOI: 10.1259/bjr/79184355

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  13 in total

1.  Ability of serum prostate-specific antigen levels to predict normal bone scans in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  M E Gleave; D Coupland; D Drachenberg; L Cohen; S Kwong; S L Goldenberg; L D Sullivan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  When is bone scintigraphy necessary in the assessment of newly diagnosed, untreated prostate cancer?

Authors:  S Haukaas; J Roervik; O J Halvorsen; M Foelling
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1997-05

3.  A study on staging bone scans in newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  R Ayyathurai; R Mahapatra; R Rajasundaram; V Srinivasan; N P Archard; H Toussi
Journal:  Urol Int       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Which patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer need a radionuclide bone scan? An analysis based on 631 patients.

Authors:  N Lee; R Fawaaz; C A Olsson; M C Benson; D P Petrylak; P B Schiff; E Bagiella; A Singh; R D Ennis
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Predicting radionuclide bone scan findings in patients with newly diagnosed, untreated prostate cancer: prostate specific antigen is superior to all other clinical parameters.

Authors:  F M Chybowski; J J Keller; E J Bergstralh; J E Oesterling
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  When is a bone scan study appropriate in asymptomatic men diagnosed with prostate cancer?

Authors:  Raj P Pal; Thivyaan Thiruudaian; Masood A Khan
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 3.285

7.  Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations--a nationwide survey.

Authors:  May Sadik; Madis Suurkula; Peter Höglund; Andreas Järund; Lars Edenbrandt
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-03-29       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Serum prostate-specific antigen as a predictor of radiographic staging studies in newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Huncharek; J Muscat
Journal:  Cancer Invest       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.176

9.  Broadening the criteria for avoiding staging bone scans in prostate cancer: a retrospective study of patients at the Royal Marsden Hospital.

Authors:  J M O'Sullivan; A R Norman; G J Cook; C Fisher; D P Dearnaley
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  When to perform bone scan in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: external validation of the currently available guidelines and proposal of a novel risk stratification tool.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Niccolò Passoni; Matteo Ferrari; Umberto Capitanio; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Gallina; Luigi Filippo Da Pozzo; Maria Picchio; Valerio Di Girolamo; Andrea Salonia; Liugi Gianolli; Cristina Messa; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-12-18       Impact factor: 20.096

View more
  12 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: searching for bone metastases--how, when and why?

Authors:  Fred Saad
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Validating the screening criteria for bone metastases in treatment-naïve unfavorable intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer - the prevalence and location of bone- and lymph node metastases.

Authors:  Erik Rud; Daniyal Noor; Kristina Flor Galtung; Fredrik Ottosson; Maciej Jacewicz; Eduard Baco; Peter Mæhre Lauritzen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 7.034

Review 3.  Systematic review of interventions that improve provider compliance to imaging guidelines for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Samuel M Pettit; David Mikhail; Michael Feuerstein
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.052

4.  Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Authors:  Selin Merdan; Paul R Womble; David C Miller; Christine Barnett; Zaojun Ye; Susan M Linsell; James E Montie; Brian T Denton
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Application of bone scans for prostate cancer staging: Which guideline shows better result?

Authors:  Ari Chong; Insang Hwang; Jung-Min Ha; Seong Hyeon Yu; Eu Chang Hwang; Ho Song Yu; Sun Ouck Kim; Seung-Il Jung; Taek Won Kang; Dong Deuk Kwon; Kwangsung Park
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Staging 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in 963 consecutive patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: incidence and characterization of skeletal involvement.

Authors:  Mikhail Kesler; Kosta Kerzhner; Ido Druckmann; Jonathan Kuten; Charles Levine; David Sarid; Daniel Keizman; Ofer Yossepowitch; Einat Even-Sapir
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  A narrowing range of bone scan in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients: A retrospective comparative study.

Authors:  Berat Cem Özgür; Sinan Gültekin; Musa Ekici; Demet Yılmazer; Murat Alper
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

8.  Incorporating multiparametric MRI staging and the new histological Grade Group system improves risk-stratified detection of bone metastasis in prostate cancer.

Authors:  David Thurtle; Ray C J Hsu; Madhurima Chetan; Artitaya Lophatananon; Rachel Hubbard; Vincent J Gnanapragasam; Tristan Barrett
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Practice patterns and outcomes of equivocal bone scans for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: Results from SEARCH.

Authors:  Brian T Hanyok; Mary M Everist; Lauren E Howard; Amanda M De Hoedt; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher J Kane; Christopher L Amling; Martha K Terris; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2019-01-18

10.  Reporting and Handling of Indeterminate Bone Scan Results in the Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Lars J Petersen; Jesper Strandberg; Louise Stenholt; Martin B Johansen; Helle D Zacho
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2018-01-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.