Baowei Fei1,2,3, Peter T Nieh4, Viraj A Master4, Yun Zhang1, Adeboye O Osunkoya3,4,5,6, David M Schuster1. 1. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, 1841 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. 3. Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. 4. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA. 5. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA. 6. Department of Pathology, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, GA 30033, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This paper provides a review on molecular imaging with positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer detection and its applications in fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate. METHODS: Literature search was performed through the PubMed database using the keywords "prostate cancer", "MRI/ultrasound fusion", "molecular imaging", and "targeted biopsy". Estimates in autopsy studies indicate that 50% of men older than 50 years of age have prostate cancer. Systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy is considered the standard method for prostate cancer detection and has a significant sampling error and a low sensitivity. Molecular imaging technology and new biopsy approaches are emerging to improve the detection of prostate cancer. RESULTS: Molecular imaging with PET and MRI shows promising results in the early detection of prostate cancer. MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy has become a new clinical standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. PET molecular image-directed, three-dimensional ultrasound-guided biopsy is a new technology that has great potential for improving prostate cancer detection rate and for distinguishing aggressive prostate cancer from indolent disease. CONCLUSION: Molecular imaging and fusion targeted biopsy are active research areas in prostate cancer research.
PURPOSE: This paper provides a review on molecular imaging with positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for prostate cancer detection and its applications in fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate. METHODS: Literature search was performed through the PubMed database using the keywords "prostate cancer", "MRI/ultrasound fusion", "molecular imaging", and "targeted biopsy". Estimates in autopsy studies indicate that 50% of men older than 50 years of age have prostate cancer. Systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy is considered the standard method for prostate cancer detection and has a significant sampling error and a low sensitivity. Molecular imaging technology and new biopsy approaches are emerging to improve the detection of prostate cancer. RESULTS: Molecular imaging with PET and MRI shows promising results in the early detection of prostate cancer. MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy has become a new clinical standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. PET molecular image-directed, three-dimensional ultrasound-guided biopsy is a new technology that has great potential for improving prostate cancer detection rate and for distinguishing aggressive prostate cancer from indolent disease. CONCLUSION: Molecular imaging and fusion targeted biopsy are active research areas in prostate cancer research.
Authors: David M Schuster; John R Votaw; Peter T Nieh; Weiping Yu; Jonathon A Nye; Viraj Master; F DuBois Bowman; Muta M Issa; Mark M Goodman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Annerleim Walton Diaz; Anthony N Hoang; Baris Turkbey; Cheng William Hong; Hong Truong; Todd Sterling; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Lambros Stamatakis; Srinivas Vourganti; Jeffrey Nix; Jennifer Logan; Colette Harris; Michael Weintraub; Celene Chua; Maria J Merino; Peter Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-06-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Esther Mena; Joanna Shih; Peter A Pinto; Maria J Merino; Maria L Lindenberg; Marcelino Bernardo; Yolanda L McKinney; Stephen Adler; Rikard Owenius; Peter L Choyke; Karen A Kurdziel Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Simona Malaspina; Ugo De Giorgi; Jukka Kemppainen; Angelo Del Sole; Giovanni Paganelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Baowei Fei; Olayinka A Abiodun-Ojo; Akinyemi A Akintayo; Oladunni Akin-Akintayo; Funmilayo Tade; Peter T Nieh; Viraj A Master; Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Mark M Goodman; David M Schuster Journal: J Urol Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Olayinka A Abiodun-Ojo; Akinyemi A Akintayo; Oladunni O Akin-Akintayo; Funmilayo I Tade; Peter T Nieh; Viraj A Master; Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Mark M Goodman; Baowei Fei; David M Schuster Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-04-06 Impact factor: 10.057