Imaging Studies in Metastatic Urogenital Cancer Patients Undergoing Systemic Therapy: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Consensus Meeting of the Association of Urological Oncology of the German Cancer SocietyHeidenreich A.a · Albers P.b · Classen J.f · Graefen M.h · Gschwend J.c · Kotzerke J.i · Krege S.d · Lehmann J.j · Rohde D.e · Schmidberger H.g · Uder M.k · Zeeb H.l
Departments of Urology,aRWTH University, Aachen, bHeinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, c Technical University, Munich, dKrankenhaus Maria Hilf, Krefeld, and eKatholisches Krankenhaus Duisburg Zentrum, Duisburg; Departments of Radiation Oncology, fSt. Vincentius Hospital, Karlsruhe, and gJohannes Gutenberg University, Mainz; hMartini-Klinik, University Hospital, Hamburg; iDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Carl Gustav Carus University, Dresden; jUrologist, Kiel; kDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital, Erlangen; lDepartment of Biostatistics, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany
Prof. Dr. med. Axel Heidenreich
Department of Urology, RWTH University Aachen
DE–52074 Aachen (Germany)
Tel. +49 241 808 9377, Fax +49 241 802 441, E-Mail firstname.lastname@example.org
Do you have an account?
Introduction: Imaging studies are an integral and important diagnostic modality to stage, to monitor and follow-up patients with metastatic urogenital cancer. The currently available guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of urogenital cancer do not provide the clinician with evidence-based recommendations for daily practice. Objectives: To develop scientifically valid recommendations with regard to the most appropriate imaging technique and the most useful time interval in metastatic urogenital cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed searching MedLine, Embase and Web of Science databases using the terms prostate, renal cell, bladder and testis cancer in combination with the variables lymph node, lung, liver, bone metastases, chemotherapy and molecular therapy, and the search terms computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography were applied. A total of 11,834 records were retrieved from all databases. The panel reviewed the records to identify articles with the highest level of evidence using the recommendation of the US Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Conclusions: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography remains the standard imaging technique for monitoring of pulmonary, hepatic and lymph node metastases. Bone scintigraphy is still the most widely used imaging technique for the detection and follow-up of osseous lesions. For clinical trials it might be replaced by either PET-CT or MRI of the skeletal axis. Response assessment for patients treated with cytotoxic regime is best performed by the RECIST/WHO criteria; treatment response to molecular triggered therapy is best assessed by CT evaluating decrease in tumor size and density. Cross-sectional imaging studies for response assessment might be obtained after each 2 cycles of systemic therapy to early stratify responders from non-responders.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.