Imaging evaluation of prostate cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT: utility and limitations
- 951 Downloads
Prostate cancer is a major public health problem in developed countries. The remarkable biological and clinical heterogeneity of prostate cancer provides unique opportunities as well as challenges for the diagnostic imaging evaluation of this prevalent disease. The disease is characterized by a natural history that ranges from localized slowly growing hormone-dependent tumor progressing to metastatic hormone-refractory disease. PET is an ideal imaging tool for noninvasive interrogation of the underlying tumor biology. 18F-FDG is the most common PET radiotracer used for oncological applications based upon elevated glucose metabolism in malignant tissue in comparison to normal tissue. FDG uptake in prostate cancer depends on tumor differentiation with low accumulation in well-differentiated tumors and high uptake in aggressive poorly differentiated tumors. Cumulative current evidence suggests that FDG PET may be useful in detection of disease in a small fraction of patients with biochemical recurrence, in the imaging evaluation of extent and treatment response in metastatic disease and in prediction of patient outcome.
KeywordsProstate Cancer FDG PET
This work was supported by the US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute (grants R01-CA111613 and R21-CA142426).
Conflicts of interest
- 1.Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results. National Cancer Institute. Stat fact sheets: prostate. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html.
- 7.Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock I, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA, et al. Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1148–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Stewardt GD, Gray K, Pennington CJ, Edwards DR, Riddick AC, Ross JA, et al. Analysis of hypoxia-associated gene expression in prostate cancer: lysyl oxidase and glucose transporter 1 expression correlate with Gleason score. Oncol Rep. 2008;20:1561–7.Google Scholar
- 30.Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, D’Amico AV, Dmochowski RR, et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association prostate guidelines for localized prostate cancer update panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol. 2007;177:540–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Roach III M, Hanks G, Thames Jr H, Schellhammer P, Shipley WU, Sokol GH, et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix consensus conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:965–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Picchio M, Briganti A, Fanti S, Heidenreich A, Krause BJ, Messa C, et al. The role of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of patients with prostate-specific antigen progression after radical treatment of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol. 2011;59:51–60.Google Scholar
- 35.Seltzer MA, Barbaric Z, Belldegrun A, Naitoh J, Dorey F, Phelps ME, et al. Comparison of helical computerized tomography, positron emission tomography and monoclonal antibody scans for evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with prostate specific antigen relapse after treatment for localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 1999;162:1322–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.Jadvar H, Desai B, Quinn D, Dorff T, Pinski J, Conti P, et al. Treatment response assessment of metastatic prostate cancer with FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2011;52 Suppl 1:1908.Google Scholar
- 40.Bubley GJ, Carducci M, Dahut W, Dawson N, Daliani D, Eisenberger M, et al. Eligibility and response guidelines for phase II clinical trials in androgen-independent prostate cancer: recommendations from the PSA Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1–7.Google Scholar
- 45.Jadvar H, Desai B, Ji L, Conti P, Dorff T, Pinski J, et al. Prognostic utility of FDG PET/CT in men with castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2012;53 Suppl 1:116.Google Scholar