TY - JOUR
T1 - Optimum imaging strategies for advanced prostate cancer
T2 - ASCO guideline
AU - Trabulsi, Edouard J.
AU - Rumble, R. Bryan
AU - Jadvar, Hossein
AU - Hope, Thomas
AU - Pomper, Martin
AU - Turkbey, Baris
AU - Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
AU - Verma, Sadhna
AU - Margolis, Daniel J.
AU - Froemming, Adam
AU - Oto, Aytekin
AU - Purysko, Andrei
AU - Milowsky, Matthew I.
AU - Schlemmer, Heinz Peter
AU - Eiber, Matthias
AU - Morris, Michael J.
AU - Choyke, Peter L.
AU - Padhani, Anwar
AU - Oldan, Jorge
AU - Fanti, Stefano
AU - Jain, Suneil
AU - Pinto, Peter A.
AU - Keegan, Kirk A.
AU - Porter, Christopher R.
AU - Coleman, Jonathan A.
AU - Bauman, Glenn S.
AU - Jani, Ashesh B.
AU - Kamradt, Jeffrey M.
AU - Sholes, Westley
AU - Vargas, H. Alberto
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - PURPOSE Provide evidence- and expert-based recommendations for optimal use of imaging in advanced prostate cancer. Due to increases in research and utilization of novel imaging for advanced prostate cancer, this guideline is intended to outline techniques available and provide recommendations on appropriate use of imaging for specified patient subgroups. METHODS An Expert Panel was convened with members from ASCO and the Society of Abdominal Radiology, American College of Radiology, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology to conduct a systematic review of the literature and develop an evidence-based guideline on the optimal use of imaging for advanced prostate cancer. Representative index cases of various prostate cancer disease states are presented, including suspected high-risk disease, newly diagnosed treatment-naïve metastatic disease, suspected recurrent disease after local treatment, and progressive disease while undergoing systemic treatment. A systematic review of the literature from 2013 to August 2018 identified fully published English-language systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, reports of rigorously conducted phase III randomized controlled trials that compared $ 2 imaging modalities, and noncomparative studies that reported on the efficacy of a single imaging modality. RESULTS A total of 35 studies met inclusion criteria and form the evidence base, including 17 systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and 18 primary research articles. RECOMMENDATIONS One or more of these imaging modalities should be used for patients with advanced prostate cancer: conventional imaging (defined as computed tomography [CT], bone scan, and/or prostate magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and/or next-generation imaging (NGI), positron emission tomography [PET], PET/CT, PET/MRI, or whole-body MRI) according to the clinical scenario.
AB - PURPOSE Provide evidence- and expert-based recommendations for optimal use of imaging in advanced prostate cancer. Due to increases in research and utilization of novel imaging for advanced prostate cancer, this guideline is intended to outline techniques available and provide recommendations on appropriate use of imaging for specified patient subgroups. METHODS An Expert Panel was convened with members from ASCO and the Society of Abdominal Radiology, American College of Radiology, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, American Urological Association, American Society for Radiation Oncology, and Society of Urologic Oncology to conduct a systematic review of the literature and develop an evidence-based guideline on the optimal use of imaging for advanced prostate cancer. Representative index cases of various prostate cancer disease states are presented, including suspected high-risk disease, newly diagnosed treatment-naïve metastatic disease, suspected recurrent disease after local treatment, and progressive disease while undergoing systemic treatment. A systematic review of the literature from 2013 to August 2018 identified fully published English-language systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses, reports of rigorously conducted phase III randomized controlled trials that compared $ 2 imaging modalities, and noncomparative studies that reported on the efficacy of a single imaging modality. RESULTS A total of 35 studies met inclusion criteria and form the evidence base, including 17 systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and 18 primary research articles. RECOMMENDATIONS One or more of these imaging modalities should be used for patients with advanced prostate cancer: conventional imaging (defined as computed tomography [CT], bone scan, and/or prostate magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and/or next-generation imaging (NGI), positron emission tomography [PET], PET/CT, PET/MRI, or whole-body MRI) according to the clinical scenario.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081933732&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85081933732&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.19.02757
DO - 10.1200/JCO.19.02757
M3 - Review article
C2 - 31940221
AN - SCOPUS:85081933732
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 38
SP - 1963
EP - 1996
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 17
ER -