Advertisement

EPMA Journal

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 415–423 | Cite as

Abdominal aortic aneurysm in prostate cancer patients: the “road map” from incidental detection to advanced predictive, preventive, and personalized approach utilizing common follow-up for both pathologies

  • Jiri Ferda
  • Jan BaxaEmail author
  • Eva Ferdova
  • Radek Kucera
  • Ondrej Topolcan
  • Jiri Molacek
Research
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is often a hidden pathological process showing no clinical symptoms. Genetic burden, smoking, male gender, age > 65 years, and white race have been identified as the main risk factors. A regular screening program has been introduced but is, as yet, unclear and is not performed in most countries. Prostate cancer is the most frequent male malignant disease in Western countries. Prostate cancer is a disease of older age with a median primary diagnosis of over 60 years. In recent years, advanced imaging methods have been established as important diagnostic tools in prostate cancer diagnostics. The incidental detection of AAA during diagnostic imaging performed due to prostate cancer diagnosis could reveal some asymptomatic aneurysms. Using our experience, the incidental detection of AAA during 18F-fluoromethylcholine PET/CT imaging, performed due to the staging, follow-up, and restaging of the prostate cancer, was reworked into a regular tool of secondary prevention within the framework of personalized medicine strategies. Experience with this type of AAA detection is demonstrated by a cohort of 500 patients who underwent 18F-fluorometylcholine PET/CT examination due to the staging or restaging of prostate cancer. A total of 28 aneurysms were detected (26 aneurysms < 50 mm, 2 aneurysms > 50 mm). In 2 cases (diameter < 50 mm), serious complications were found (penetrating aortic ulcer). The detection and monitoring of AAA in patients undergoing 18F-fluorometylcholine PET/CT due to the prostate cancer offers the possibility of a secondary prevention of AAA, patient stratification, and common follow-up for both pathologies.

Keywords

Abdominal aortic aneurysm Prostate cancer 18F-fluorometylcholine Iodine contrast agent PET/CT Personalized follow-up Predictive value of imaging methods Patient stratification Screening Primary prevention Secondary prevention Prognosis Diagnostic algorithm Androgen deprivation Rupture Incidence Diameter Risk factors General population Stent graft placement Multivariate model Biomarker panel American Association for Vascular Surgery Society for Vascular Surgery 

Abbreviations

AAA

Abdominal aortic aneurysm

ASIR

Age-standardized incidence rate

ASMR

The age-standardized mortality rate

CT

Computed tomography

DRE

Digital rectal examination

F

Fluor

18F-FCH

18F-fluoromethylcholine

HDI

Human development index

kV

Kilo volt

MBq

Mega Becquerel

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

PET

Positron emission tomography

PCa

Prostate cancer

PSA

Prostate specific antigen

Notes

Funding information

This study was supported by a Grant from the Czech Health Research Council No.15-32727A and by the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic-Conceptual Development of Research Organization (University Hospital in Pilsen-FNPl, 00669806).

Compliance with ethical standards

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All investigations conformed to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all the participants. The study was approved by the responsible Ethical Committee of the University Hospital in Pilsen on 12th of August 2014.

References

  1. 1.
    Golubnitschaja O, Lemke HU, Kapalla M, Kent A. Design in predictive, preventive and personalised medicine. In: Kuksa I, Fisher T, editors. Design for Personalisation. London: Gower Publishing; 2017. p. 150–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johnston KW, Rutherford RB, Tilson MD, Shah DM, Hollier L, Stanley JC. Suggested standards for reporting on arterial aneurysms. Subcommittee on Reporting Standards for Arterial Aneurysms, Ad Hoc Committee on Reporting Standards, Society for Vascular Surgery and North American Chapter, International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg. 1991;13:452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chaikof EL, Dalman RL, Eskandari MK, Jackson BM, Lee WA, Mansour MA, et al. The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2018;67:2–77.e2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Forsdahl SH, Singh K, Solberg S, Jacobsen BK. Risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a 7-year prospective study: the Tromsø Study, 1994-2001. Circulation. 2009;119:2202–8.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.817619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ashton HA, Buxton MJ, Day NE, Kim LG, Marteau TM, Scott RA, et al. The Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study Group. The Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) into the effect of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening on mortality in men: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:1531–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Svensjö S, Björck M, Gürtelschmid M, Djavani Gidlund K, Hellberg A, Wanhainen A. Low prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm among 65-year-old Swedish men indicates a change in the epidemiology of the disease. Circulation. 2011;124:1118–23.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.030379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vardulaki KA, Prevost TC, Walker NM, Day NE, Wilmink AB, Quick CR, et al. Incidence among men of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms: estimates from 500 screen detected cases. J Med Screen. 1999;6:50–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oliver-Williams C, Sweeting MJ, Turton G, Parkin D, Cooper D, Rodd C, et al. Lessons learned about prevalence and growth rates of abdominal aortic aneurysms from a 25-year ultrasound population screening programme. Br J Surg. 2018;105:68–74.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johnsen SH, Forsdahl SH, Singh K, Jacobsen BK. Atherosclerosis in abdominal aortic aneurysms: a causal event or a process running in parallel? The Tromsø study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010;30:1263–8.  https://doi.org/10.1161/ATVBAHA.110.203588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yazbek G, Nishinari K, Krutman M, Wolosker N, Zottelle Bomfim GA, Pignataro BS, et al. Treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in cancer patients. Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;30:159–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2015.07.043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norman PE, Jamrozik K, Lawrence-Brown MM, Le MT, Spencer CA, Tuohy RJ, et al. Population based randomised controlled trial on impact of screening on mortality from abdominal aortic aneurysm. BMJ. 2004;329:1259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Golubnitschaja O, Baban B, Boniolo G, Wang W, Bubnov R, Kapalla M, et al. Medicine in the early twenty-first century: paradigm and anticipation-EPMA position paper 2016. EPMA J. 2016;7:23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aune D, Schlesinger S, Norat T, Riboli E. Tobacco smoking and the risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Sci Rep. 2018;8:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32100-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sakalihasan N, Michel JB, Katsargyris A, Kuivaniemi H, Defraigne JO, Nchimi A, et al. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2018;4:34.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-018-0030-7.
  15. 15.
    Cortaredona S, Ventelou B. The extra cost of comorbidity: multiple illnesses and the economic burden of non-communicable diseases. BMC Med. 2017;15:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0978-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cooperberg MR, Chan JM. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2017;35:849.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2038-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sharma R. The burden of prostate cancer is associated with human development index: evidence from 87 countries, 1990-2016. EPMA J. 2019;10:137–52.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13167-019-00169-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Janssens JP, Schuster K, Voss A. Preventive, predictive, and personalized medicine for effective and affordable cancer care. EPMA J. 2018;9:113–23.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13167-018-0130-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lu M, Zhan X. The crucial role of multiomic approach in cancer research and clinically relevant outcomes. EPMA J. 2018;9:77–102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13167-018-0128-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dolejsova O, Kucera R, Fuchsova R, Topolcan O, Svobodova H, Hes O, et al. The ability of prostate health index (PHI) to predict Gleason score in patients with prostate cancer and discriminate patients between Gleason score 6 and Gleason score higher than 6-a study on 320 patients after radical prostatectomy. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2018;17:1533033818787377.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1533033818787377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ulug P, Powell JT, Sweeting MJ, Bown MJ, Thompson SG, SWAN Collaborative Group. Meta-analysis of the current prevalence of screen-detected abdominal aortic aneurysm in women. Br J Surg. 2016;103:1097–104.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Davis JP, Salmon M, Pope NH, Lu G, Su G, Meher A, et al. Pharmacologic blockade and genetic deletion of androgen receptor attenuates aortic aneurysm formation. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63:1602–1612.e2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.11.038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dickey SL, Grayson CJ. The quality of life among men receiving active surveillance for prostate cancer: an integrative review. Healthcare (Basel). 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare7010014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Golubnitschaja O, Costigliola V, EPMA. General report & recommendations in predictive, preventive and personalised medicine 2012: white paper of the European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine. EPMA J. 2012;3:14.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1878-5085-3-14.
  26. 26.
    Younesi E, Hofmann-Apitius M. From integrative disease modeling to predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory (P4) medicine. EPMA J. 2013;4:23.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1878-5085-4-23.
  27. 27.
    Borthwick KM, Smelser DT, Bock JA, Elmore JR, Ryer EJ, Pacheco JA, et al. ePhenotyping for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network: algorithm development and Konstanz information miner workflow. Int J Biomed Data Min. 2015;4:113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee R, Jarchi D, Perera R, Jones A, Cassimjee I, Handa A, et al. Applied machine learning for the prediction of growth of abdominal aortic aneurysm in humans. EJVES Short Rep. 2018;39:24–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvssr.2018.03.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Berman L, Curry L, Goldberg C, Gusberg R, Fraenkel L. Pilot testing of a decision support tool for patients with abdominal aortic neurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:285–92.e1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2010.08.075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Meess KM, Izzo RL, Dryjski ML, Curl RE, Harris LM, Springer M, et al. 3D Printed abdominal aortic aneurysm phantom for image guided surgical planning with a patient specific Fenestrated Endovascular Graft System. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2253902.
  31. 31.
    Yuan D, Luo H, Yang H, Huang B, Zhu J, Zhao J. Precise treatment of aortic aneurysm by three-dimensional printing and simulation before endovascular intervention. Sci Rep. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00644-4.
  32. 32.
    Bortman J, Mahmood F, Schermerhorn M, Lo R, Swerdlow N, Mahmood F, et al. Use of 3-dimensional printing to create patient-specific abdominal aortic aneurysm models for preoperative planning. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.08.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Li J, Pan C, Zhang S, Spin JM, Deng A, Leung LLK, et al. Decoding the Genomics of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm. Cell. 2018;174:1361–72.e10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.07.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Molacek J, Treska V, Zeithaml J, Hollan I, Topolcan O, Pecen L, et al. Blood biomarker panel recommended for personalized prediction, prognosis, and prevention of complications associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm. EPMA Journal. 2019;10:125–35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13167-019-00173-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lederle FA, Johnson GR, Wilson SE, Gordon IL, Chute EP, Littooy FN, et al. Relationship of age, gender, race, and body size to infrarenal aortic diameter. The Aneurysm Detection and Management (ADAM) Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Investigators. J Vasc Surg. 1997;26:595–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wong DR, Willett WC, Rimm EB. Smoking, hypertension, alcohol consumption, and risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm in men. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165:838–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sweeting MJ, Thompson SG, Brown LC, Powell JT, RESCAN collaborators. Meta-analysis of individual patient data to examine factors affecting growth and rupture of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Br J Surg. 2012;99:655–65.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Brady AR, Thompson SG, Fowkes FG, Greenhalgh RM, Powell JT. UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. Abdominal aortic aneurysm expansion: risk factors and time intervals for surveillance. Circulation. 2004;110:16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Moll FL, Powell JT, Fraedrich G, Verzini F, Haulon S, Waltham M, et al. Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European society for vascular surgery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.09.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lo RC, Lu B, Fokkema MT, Conrad M, Patel VI, Fillinger M, et al. Relative importance of aneurysm diameter and body size for predicting abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture in men and women. J Vasc Surg. 2014.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2013.10.104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lo RC, Schermerhorn ML. Abdominal aortic aneurysms in women. J Vasc Surg. 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2015.10.087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    de Jesus-Silva SG, de Oliveira VR, de Moraes-Silva MA, Krupa AE, Cardoso RS. Risk factors and short and medium-term survival after open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Bras. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.011717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Khurana N, Sikka SC. Interplay between SOX9, Wnt/β-catenin and androgen receptor signaling in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20092066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cotter AR, Vuong K, Mustelin L, Yang Y, Rakhmankulova M, Barclay CJ, et al. Do psychological harms result from being labelled with an unexpected diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysm or prostate cancer through screening? A systematic review. BMJ Open. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Horrill T. Acute aortic dissection following treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1188/16.ONF.413-416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bandini M, Mazzone E, Preisser F, Nazzani S, Zaffuto E, Marchioni M, et al. Increase in the annual rate of newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer: a contemporary analysis of the surveillance, epidemiology and end results database. Eur Urol Oncol. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2018.04.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hu R, Wang X, Zhan X. Multi-parameter systematic strategies for predictive, preventive and personalised medicine in cancer. EPMA J. 2013;4:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1878-5085-4-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Golubnitschaja O, Watson ID, Topic E, Sandberg S, Ferrari M, Costigliola V. Position paper of the EPMA and EFLM: a global vision of the consolidated promotion of an integrative medical approach to advance health care. EPMA J. 2013;4:12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1878-5085-4-12.
  49. 49.
    Grootes I, Barrett JK, Ulug P, Rohlffs F, Laukontaus SJ, Tulamo R, et al. Predicting risk of rupture and rupture-preventing reinterventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Br J Surg. 2018;105:1294–304.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (EPMA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Imaging MethodsUniversity Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in PilsenPilsenCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Immunochemistry DiagnosticsUniversity Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in PilsenPilsenCzech Republic
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryUniversity Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in PilsenPilsenCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations