Attitudes, practices and perspectives on imaging strategies in prostate cancer: a national cross-sectional survey involving expert radiation oncologists on behalf of AIRO (Italian association of radiotherapy and clinical oncology) GU group.
Attitude of Health Personnel
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Italy
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Male
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
/ statistics & numerical data
Prostatic Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Radiation Oncologists
/ statistics & numerical data
Surveys and Questionnaires
Imaging
MRI
PSMA PET/CT
Prostate cancer
Journal
Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England)
ISSN: 1559-131X
Titre abrégé: Med Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9435512
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Nov 2021
05 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
22
09
2021
accepted:
11
10
2021
entrez:
5
11
2021
pubmed:
6
11
2021
medline:
1
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although high sensitive imaging modalities such as MRI and PSMA PET/CT are becoming available for prostate cancer (PCa), the clinical benefit of an earlier detection of subclinical disease remains yet undetermined. Given these uncertainties, univocal recommendations are often lacking. The present survey was therefore developed by the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) to collect the opinion of expert radiation oncologists and delineate a representation of current clinical practice in our country. A nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted in Italy by administering an anonymous questionnaire to experienced radiation oncologists, representative of the genitourinary (GU) tumor board at their Institution, using the cloud-based platform SurveyMonkey®. For each question, a consensus was achieved when ≥ 75% of the responders agreed on the same response. Thirty nine AIRO members from different Italian centers who were deemed experts in GU field accessed the proposed survey and completed all sections. Explored topics included staging of organ-confined disease, management of biochemical and local recurrence, imaging in the metastatic setting, imaging following metastasis-directed therapy (MDT), and future considerations. Response rate for single item of the questionnaire ranged between 51.2% and 100%. Expert GU AIRO members agree that advanced molecular and functional imaging are expanding their role in local and distant staging of PCa, as well as in the oncologic management and in the assessment of treatment response. However, many controversial issues still exist on the best timing for a diagnostic evaluation and the most appropriate imaging to aim at this purpose.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34739613
doi: 10.1007/s12032-021-01597-5
pii: 10.1007/s12032-021-01597-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3Informations de copyright
© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Murphy DG, Sweeney CJ, Tombal B. ‘“Gotta Catch ”em All’’, or Do we? Pokemet approach to metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;72:1–3.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.036
Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77:403–17.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.01.049
Hicks RJ, Murphy DG, Williams SG. Seduction by sensitivity: reality, illusion, or delusion? The challenge of assessing outcomes after PSMA imaging selection of patients for treatment. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1969–71.
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.117.198812
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer—2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79:243–62.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
Hofman MS, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multi-centre study. Lancet. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7 .
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30314-7
pubmed: 32209449
Van den Broeck T, Van den Bergh RC, Arfi N, et al. Prognostic value of biochemical recurrence following treatment with curative intent for prostate cancer a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2019;75:967–87.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.10.011
EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Milan 2021. https://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/#6 .
Bossi A, Blanchard Fanti S. Contemporary imaging technologies for men with rising prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy and before early salvage irradiation: where do we stand? Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4(3):356–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.03.003
Francolini G, Timon G, Matrone F, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy after upfront radical prostatectomy: debated issues at a turning point-a survey exploring management trends on behalf of AIRO (Italian association of radiotherapy and clinical oncology). Clin Transl Oncol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-021-02665-y .
doi: 10.1007/s12094-021-02665-y
pubmed: 34286475
Jani AB, Schreibmann E, Goyal S, et al.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00581-X
Alongi F, De Bari B, Franco P, et al. AIRO young and AIRO prostate cancer working group. The PROCAINA (PROstate CAncer INdication Attitudes) project (Part I): a survey among Italian radiation oncologists on postoperative radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Radiol Med. 2013;118(4):660–78.
doi: 10.1007/s11547-012-0913-8
Schaeffer E, Srinivas S, Antonarakis ES, et al. Prostate cancer, version 2.2021 featured updates to the NCCN guideline. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021;19(2):134–43. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2021.0008 .
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0008
pubmed: 33545689
Cornford P, van den Berger R, Bries E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II—2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79:263–82.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.046
Parker C, Castro E, Fizari K, et al. Prostate cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and followup. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:v1119-1134.
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.06.011
Virgo S, Rumble RB, de Wit R, et al. Initial management of noncastrate advance, recurrent, or metastatic prostate cancer: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1274–305.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.03256
Gillessen S, Attard G, Beer TM. Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer: report of the advanced prostate cancer consensus conference 2019. Eur Urol. 2020;77(4):508–47.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.01.012
Crawford ED, Koo PJ, Shore N, et al. A clinician’s guide to next generation imaging in patients with advanced prostate cancer (RADAR III). J Urol. 2019;201(4):682–92.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.05.164
Fizazi K, Shore N, Tammela TL, et al. Nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer and survival with darolutamide. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1040–9.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001342
Sternberg C, Fizazi K, Saad F, et al. Enzalutamide and survival in nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:2197–206.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2003892
Smith MR, Saad F, Chowdhury S, et al. Apalutamide and overall survival in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79:150–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.08.011
Vickers AJ, Brewster SF. PSA velocity and doubling time in diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer. Br J Med Surg Urol. 2012;5:162–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.bjmsu.2011.08.006
Farolfi A, Hadaschik B, Hamdy FC, et al. Positron emission tomography and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for metastasis-directed therapy in hormone-sensitive oligometastatic prostate cancer after primary radical treatment: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2021 (in press). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.003