UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Initial staging and evaluation of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer

Authors
Philip W Kantoff, MD
Mary-Ellen Taplin, MD
Joseph A Smith, MD
Section Editors
Nicholas Vogelzang, MD
W Robert Lee, MD, MS, MEd
Jerome P Richie, MD, FACS
Deputy Editor
Michael E Ross, MD

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men worldwide, with an estimated 1,100,000 cases and 307,000 deaths in 2012 [1]. In the United States there will be an estimated 181,000 cases and 26,100 deaths in 2016 [2]. The clinical behavior of prostate cancer ranges from a microscopic, well-differentiated tumor that may never be clinically significant to an aggressive, invasive cancer that ultimately results in metastases, morbidity, and death.

Once the diagnosis of prostate cancer is established, further evaluation that incorporates known risk factors is required to determine appropriate treatment options. The prostate cancer staging system and the initial staging evaluation are reviewed here.

The initial clinical presentation including indications for biopsy, the ramifications of risk stratification, and the approach to treatment are discussed separately.

(See "Clinical presentation and diagnosis of prostate cancer" and "Prostate cancer: Risk stratification and choice of initial treatment".)

(See "Initial approach to low- and very low-risk clinically localized prostate cancer".)

                      

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Nov 2016. | This topic last updated: Thu Jan 15 00:00:00 GMT 2015.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Humphrey PA. Cancers of the male reproductive organs. In: World Cancer Report, Stewart BW, Wild CP (Eds), World Health Organization, Lyon 2014.
  2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016; 66:7.
  3. Prostate. In: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, Springer, New York 2010. p.457.
  4. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp (Accessed on February 27, 2016).
  5. Sartor O, Eisenberger M, Kattan MW, et al. Unmet needs in the prediction and detection of metastases in prostate cancer. Oncologist 2013; 18:549.
  6. Tombal B, Lecouvet F. Modern Detection of Prostate Cancer's Bone Metastasis: Is the Bone Scan Era Over? Adv Urol 2012; 2012:893193.
  7. Abuzallouf S, Dayes I, Lukka H. Baseline staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a summary of the literature. J Urol 2004; 171:2122.
  8. Lee N, Fawaaz R, Olsson CA, et al. Which patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer need a radionuclide bone scan? An analysis based on 631 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 48:1443.
  9. Lecouvet FE, Geukens D, Stainier A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:3281.
  10. Kitajima K, Murphy RC, Nathan MA, Sugimura K. Update on positron emission tomography for imaging of prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2014; 21:12.
  11. Morris MJ, Akhurst T, Osman I, et al. Fluorinated deoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in progressive metastatic prostate cancer. Urology 2002; 59:913.
  12. Morris MJ, Akhurst T, Larson SM, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as an outcome measure for castrate metastatic prostate cancer treated with antimicrotubule chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11:3210.
  13. DeGrado TR, Coleman RE, Wang S, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of 18F-labeled choline as an oncologic tracer for positron emission tomography: initial findings in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2001; 61:110.
  14. Cimitan M, Bortolus R, Morassut S, et al. [18F]fluorocholine PET/CT imaging for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer at PSA relapse: experience in 100 consecutive patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33:1387.
  15. Oyama N, Miller TR, Dehdashti F, et al. 11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer: detection of recurrent disease at PSA relapse. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:549.
  16. Wachter S, Tomek S, Kurtaran A, et al. 11C-acetate positron emission tomography imaging and image fusion with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with recurrent prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:2513.
  17. Albrecht S, Buchegger F, Soloviev D, et al. (11)C-acetate PET in the early evaluation of prostate cancer recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34:185.
  18. Sandblom G, Sörensen J, Lundin N, et al. Positron emission tomography with C11-acetate for tumor detection and localization in patients with prostate-specific antigen relapse after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2006; 67:996.
  19. Damle NA, Bal C, Bandopadhyaya GP, et al. The role of 18F-fluoride PET-CT in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast, lung and prostate carcinoma: a comparison with FDG PET/CT and 99mTc-MDP bone scan. Jpn J Radiol 2013; 31:262.