Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa1, Marcello Rodari2, Maria Bonora1, Paola Fanti1, Cristiana Fodor3, Giovanna Pepe2, Egesta Lopci2, Dario Zerini3, Barbara Vischioni4, Guido Baroni5, Deliu Victor Matei6, Ottavio De Cobelli7, Arturo Chiti2, Roberto Orecchia8. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. 4. Division of Radiation Oncology and Radiobiology, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO) Foundation, Pavia, Italy. Electronic address: vischioni@cnao.it. 5. Division of Radiation Oncology and Radiobiology, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO) Foundation, Pavia, Italy; Department of Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy. 6. Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. 7. Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiation Oncology and Radiobiology, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO) Foundation, Pavia, Italy; Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to analyze the role of [(11)C]choline-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (cho-PET/CT) in the management of patients with prostate cancer referred for radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria for this retrospective study were (1) presence of prostate cancer, (2) referral for first radiotherapy course (for primary or recurrent tumor) between February 2007 and July 2010, and (3) performance of cho-PET/CT. All cho-PET/CT scans were classified according to whether they were positive in the prostate/prostate bed (T), pelvic lymph nodes (N), and distant metastases (M) or negative. Therapeutic strategy based on the cho-PET/CT evaluation was compared with the strategy that would have been proposed had cho-PET/CT imaging not been available, following international and national prostate cancer guidelines. RESULTS: Eighty-two cho-PET/CT scans performed in 74 patients were analyzed. Cho-PET/CT was positive in 49 studies (60%): T only in 22 (45% of all positive studies); N only in 4 (8%); T in combination with N in 3 (6%); and M in combination with T or N, or both, in 16 (33%). Treatment after positive cho-PET/CT examination included radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation (29 patients), surgery ± radiotherapy (6 patients), androgen deprivation only (8 patients), and other treatment (6 patients). In 22 cases, cho-PET/CT (27%) altered the treatment approach compared with the treatment that would have been adopted in the absence of cho-PET/CT analysis. CONCLUSION: Cho-PET/CT is valuable in defining the extent of disease and supporting therapeutic decisions in the management of prostate cancer. The therapeutic strategy turned out to be influenced by cho-PET/CT imaging in about one third of the patients included in this study.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to analyze the role of [(11)C]choline-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (cho-PET/CT) in the management of patients with prostate cancer referred for radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria for this retrospective study were (1) presence of prostate cancer, (2) referral for first radiotherapy course (for primary or recurrent tumor) between February 2007 and July 2010, and (3) performance of cho-PET/CT. All cho-PET/CT scans were classified according to whether they were positive in the prostate/prostate bed (T), pelvic lymph nodes (N), and distant metastases (M) or negative. Therapeutic strategy based on the cho-PET/CT evaluation was compared with the strategy that would have been proposed had cho-PET/CT imaging not been available, following international and national prostate cancer guidelines. RESULTS: Eighty-two cho-PET/CT scans performed in 74 patients were analyzed. Cho-PET/CT was positive in 49 studies (60%): T only in 22 (45% of all positive studies); N only in 4 (8%); T in combination with N in 3 (6%); and M in combination with T or N, or both, in 16 (33%). Treatment after positive cho-PET/CT examination included radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation (29 patients), surgery ± radiotherapy (6 patients), androgen deprivation only (8 patients), and other treatment (6 patients). In 22 cases, cho-PET/CT (27%) altered the treatment approach compared with the treatment that would have been adopted in the absence of cho-PET/CT analysis. CONCLUSION:Cho-PET/CT is valuable in defining the extent of disease and supporting therapeutic decisions in the management of prostate cancer. The therapeutic strategy turned out to be influenced by cho-PET/CT imaging in about one third of the patients included in this study.
Authors: Jeremie Calais; Johannes Czernin; Minsong Cao; Amar U Kishan; John V Hegde; Narek Shaverdian; Kiri Sandler; Fang-I Chu; Chris R King; Michael L Steinberg; Isabel Rauscher; Nina-Sophie Schmidt-Hegemann; Thorsten Poeppel; Philipp Hetkamp; Francesco Ceci; Ken Herrmann; Wolfgang P Fendler; Matthias Eiber; Nicholas G Nickols Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: M Picchio; P Mapelli; V Panebianco; P Castellucci; E Incerti; A Briganti; G Gandaglia; M Kirienko; F Barchetti; C Nanni; F Montorsi; L Gianolli; S Fanti Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-01-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Florian Sterzing; Clemens Kratochwil; Hannah Fiedler; Sonja Katayama; Gregor Habl; Klaus Kopka; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Jürgen Debus; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 9.236