Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

PET and prostate cancer

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The diagnosis of prostate cancer leaves some questions without answers. The different diagnostic techniques are limited in three situations: (1) staging of the tumour: identification of node involvement, (2) quantification of the tumour volume and its location inside the gland, (3) premature identification of relapse after radical treatment. These are the three problems that we need to consider in the diagnosis of prostate carcinoma. Imaging techniques can tell us the morphological alterations in the structures and organs. Positron emission tomography (PET) introduces a new way of identifying damage by counting metabolic activity. The tracers are substances that are marked with a radioactive molecule that is picked up more readily by the tumours. The presence of these substances in a set anatomic zone means higher consumption and therefore more metabolic activity. The radiotracer most frequently used in PET is glucose marked with fluoride 18. The first studies with marked glucose and prostate tumours started at the end of the 1990s. There are many contradictions in the results of these studies due to renal elimination, which produces an accumulation in the urinary tract and does not correctly show the prostate zone and iliobturator nodes area, and its capitation by zones with inflammatory process or prostatic hyperplasia. Choline is a substance that is present in cellular membranes. When it is marked with carbon 11, it changes to a new tracer. This radiotracer has affinity with prostate damage and allows the better differentiation of malignant from benign processes. It also has the advantage of the absence of renal elimination. Trials that used choline marked with carbon 11 (11C choline) are beginning to obtain very promising results. This union of a method that identifies metabolic activity with an imaging technique increases the sensitivity in the diagnostic test and can help find the exact location of the 11C choline deposits. The PET-CT combines the PET with computerised tomography. The 11C choline PET-CT is presented as a promising technique for answering the three problems mentioned above.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mathews D, Orhan K (2002) Oz positron emission tomography in prostate and renal cell carcinoma. Curr Opin Urol 12:381–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hara T, Kosaba N, Kishi H (1998) PET imaging of prostate cancer using carbon-11-choline. J Nucl Mec 39:990–995

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. De Jong IJ, Pruim J et al. (2003) Preoperative staging of pelvic lymph nodes in prostate cancer by 11C-choline PET. J Nucl Med 44:331–335

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. De Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH et al. (2003) 11C-choline positron emission tomography for the evaluation after treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 44:32–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu IJ, Zafar MB, Lai YH et al. (2001) Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography studies in diagnosis and staging of clinically organ-confined prostate cancer. Urology 57:108–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. LópezJ, Boan J, Rioja J et al. (2003) Metástasis pulmonar solitaria tras prostatectomía radical. Actas Urol Esp 27:637–639

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Picchio M, Messa C, Landoni C et al. (2003) Value of 11C-choline-positron emission tomography for re-staging prostate cancer: a comparison with 18F fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. J Urol 169:1337–1340

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanz G, Robles JE, Gimenez M et al. (1999) Positron emission tomography with 18 fluorine labelled deoxyglucose: utility in localized and advanced prostate cancer. BJU Int 84:1028–1031

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yeung H, Schoder H, Larson S (2002) Utility of PET/CT for assesing equivocal PET lesions in oncology—initial experience. J Nucl Med :43:32

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hospital Santos Reyes, Dpto. de Urologia, Aranda de Duero, Burgos, Burgos 09400, Spain

    G. Sanz

  2. Clínica Universitaria, Dpto de Urología, Pio XII s/n Pamplona (Navarra), Spain

    J. Rioja, J. J. Zudaire, J. M. Berián & J. A. Richter

  3. Cedro 1 and 3, Aranda de Duero, Burgos 09400, Spain

    G. Sanz

Authors
  1. G. Sanz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Rioja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. J. Zudaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. M. Berián
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. A. Richter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Sanz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanz, G., Rioja, J., Zudaire, J.J. et al. PET and prostate cancer. World J Urol 22, 351–352 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-004-0418-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-004-0418-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation