Literature DB >> 23374687

ACR Appropriateness Criteria prostate cancer--pretreatment detection, staging, and surveillance.

Steven C Eberhardt1, Scott Carter, David D Casalino, Gregory Merrick, Steven J Frank, Alexander R Gottschalk, John R Leyendecker, Paul L Nguyen, Aytekin Oto, Christopher Porter, Erick M Remer, Seth A Rosenthal.   

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most common noncutaneous male malignancy in the United States. The use of serum prostate-specific antigen as a screening tool is complicated by a significant fraction of nonlethal cancers diagnosed by biopsy. Ultrasound is used predominately as a biopsy guidance tool. Combined rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen testing, and histology from ultrasound-guided biopsy provide risk stratification for locally advanced and metastatic disease. Imaging in low-risk patients is unlikely to guide management for patients electing up-front treatment. MRI, CT, and bone scans are appropriate in intermediate-risk to high-risk patients to better assess the extent of disease, guide therapy decisions, and predict outcomes. MRI (particularly with an endorectal coil and multiparametric functional imaging) provides the best imaging for cancer detection and staging. There may be a role for prostate MRI in the context of active surveillance for low-risk patients and in cancer detection for undiagnosed clinically suspected cancer after negative biopsy results. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23374687     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.10.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  20 in total

1.  Prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an aggressive tumour variant unrecognized on T2 weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Niamh Coffey; Previn Gulavita; Omran Al-Dandan; Wael Shabana; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Imaging and evaluation of patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Luis S Beltran; Roy A Raad; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Prostate cancer bone metastases on staging prostate MRI: prevalence and clinical features associated with their diagnosis.

Authors:  Hebert Alberto Vargas; Rachel Schor-Bardach; Niamh Long; Anna N Kirzner; Jane D Cunningham; Debra A Goldman; Chaya S Moskowitz; Ramon E Sosa; Evis Sala; David M Panicek; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-01

Review 4.  A review of prostate cancer imaging, positron emission tomography, and radiopharmaceutical-based therapy.

Authors:  Amy Pawson; Zonia Ghumman; Phillip H Kuo; Hossein Jadvar; Twyla Bartel; Bobby Shayegan; Katherine Zukotynski
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 5.  Prostate cancer detection and diagnosis: the role of MR and its comparison with other diagnostic modalities--a radiologist's perspective.

Authors:  Tobias Penzkofer; Clare M Tempany-Afdhal
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 4.044

6.  Thermoacoustic contrast of prostate cancer due to heating by very high frequency irradiation.

Authors:  S K Patch; D Hull; M Thomas; S K Griep; K Jacobsohn; W A See
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-01-02       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Guideline of Guidelines: Imaging of Localized Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Daniel A Wollin; Danil V Makarov
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Information of prostate biopsy positive core: does it affect MR detection of prostate cancer on using 3T-MRI?

Authors:  Rika Yoshida; Yasushi Kaji; Yukihisa Tamaki; Takashi Katsube; Hajime Kitagaki; Tsunehito Kanbara; Takao Kamai
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.374

9.  Automating the Determination of Prostate Cancer Risk Strata From Electronic Medical Records.

Authors:  Justin R Gregg; Maximilian Lang; Lucy L Wang; Matthew J Resnick; Sandeep K Jain; Jeremy L Warner; Daniel A Barocas
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2017-06-08

Review 10.  The expanding landscape of diffusion-weighted MRI in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Andreas G Wibmer; Evis Sala; Hedvig Hricak; Hebert Alberto Vargas
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.