Nuevos paradigmas en la detección y manejo del cáncer de próstata

1 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 209-249.

2 Australian Institute for Health and Welfare. Cancer in Australia, 2021 [Cat. No. CAN 144]. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getme dia/0ea70 8ebdd6e-4499-9080-1cc7b 5990e 64/aihw-can-144.pdf.aspx?inlin e=true (viewed Apr 2022).

3 Osses DF, Roobol MJ, Schoots, IG. Prediction medicine: biomarkers, risk calculators and magnetic resonance imaging as risk stratification tools in prostate cancer diagnosis. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20: 1637.

4 Schoots IG, Padhani AR, Rouvière O, et al. Analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-directed biopsy strategies for changing the paradigm of prostate cancer diagnosis. Eur Urol Oncol 2020; 3: 32-41.

5 European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines, 2022 edition [website]. https://uroweb.org/guide lines (viewed Apr 2022).

6 National Health and Medical Research Council. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in asymptomatic men: evidence evaluation report [website]. Canberra: NHMRC, 2013. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/ defau lt/files/ documents/repor ts/clini cal%20gui delin es/men4d-psatesting-asymp tomat ic.pdf (viewed Apr 2022).

7 Ong XRS, Bagguley D, Yaxley JW, et al. Understanding the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Med J Aust 2020; 213: 424-429. https://www.mja.com.au/journ al/2020/213/9/under stand ingdiagnosis-prost ate-cancer

8 Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia and Cancer Council Australia. PSA testing and early management of test-detected prostate cancer: clinical practice guidelines. https://pcfa.org.au/media/ 61141 2/PSA-Testi ng-Guide lines-Overview.pdf (viewed Apr 2022).

9 Kelly BD, Perera M, Bolton DM, Papa N. Social determinants of health: does socioeconomic status affect access to staging imaging for men with prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022; doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-022-00508-7 [Epub ahead of print].

10 Wei G, Papa N, Kelly B, et al. Trends in the uptake of diagnostic multi-parametric MRI of the prostate with federal funding: Australia population data. Urology 2021; 155: 9-11.

11 Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate. J Urol 1989; 142: 66-70.

12 Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 61-71

13 Emmett L, Buteau J, Papa N, et al. The additive diagnostic value of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging triage in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PRIMARY): a prospective multicentre study. Eur Urol 2021; 80: 682-689.

14 Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. The European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer —prostate cancer mortality at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 2014; 384: 2027-2035.

15 Frånlund M, Månsson M, Godtman RA, et al. Results from 22 years of follow-up in the Göteborg randomized population-based prostate cancer screening trial. J Urol 2022; 208:292-300.

16 Pinksy PF, Prorook PC, Yu K, et al. Extended mortality results for prostate cancer screening in the PLCO trial with median follow-up of 15 years. Cancer 2017; 123: 592-599.

17 Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol 2013; 190: 419-426.

18 Schaeffer E, Srinivas S, Antonarakis ES, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer; version 4.2022. https://www.nccn.org/guide lines/ guide lines-detai l?category=1&id=1459? (viewed Apr 2022).

19 Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Guides for the preventive activities in general practice; 9th ed. Melbourne: RACGP, 2016. https://www.racgp.org.au/download/Docum ents/Guide lines/ Redbo ok9/17048-Red-Book-9th-Editi on.pdf (viewed Apr 2022).

20 Stabile A, Giganti F, Rosenkrantz AB, et al. Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions. Nat Rev Urol 2020; 17: 41-61.

21 Department of Health and Aged Care. Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) Items for multiparametric magnetic resonance Imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate. http://www.mbson line.gov.au/inter net/mbson line/publi shing.nsf/Conte nt/Facts heet-MRIPr ostate (viewed Apr 2022).

22 Barnett CL, Davenport MS, Montgomery JS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging and targeted fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2018; 122: 50-58.

23 Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging –Reporting and Data System: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 16-40.

24 Appayya MB, Adshead J, Ahmed HU, et al. National implementation of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection —recommendations

from a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int 2018; 122: 13-25.

25 Ahmed HU, El-Shater BA, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 2017; 389: 815-822.

26 Panebianco V, Barchetti G, Simone G, et al. Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what’s next? Eur Urol 2018; 74: 48-54.

27 Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 2018; 378: 1767-1777.

28 Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746-757.

29 Mazzone E, Stabile A, Pellegrino F, et al. Positive predictive value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4: 697-713

30 Kalapara AA, Ballok ZE, Ramdave S, et al. Combined utility of 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emisión tomography/computed tomography and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in predicting prostate biopsy pathology. Eur Urol Oncol 2022; 5: 314-320.

31 Xue AL, Kalapara AA, Ballok ZE, et al. 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positrón emission tomography maximum standardized uptake value as a predictor of Gleason pattern 4 and pathological upgrading in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2022; 207: 341-349.

32 Emmett LM, Papa N, Buteau J, et al. The PRIMARY score: using intra-prostatic PSMA PET/CT patterns to optimise prostate cancer diagnosis. J Nucl Med 2022; https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.121.263448 [Epub ahead of print].

33 Ceci F, Oprea-Lager DE, Emmett L, et al. E-PSMA:the EANM standardized reporting guidelines v1.0 for PSMA-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1626-1638.

34 Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, et al. Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2017; 71: 353-365.

35 Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, et al. Comparing three different techniques for magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsies: a systematic review of in-bore versus magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion versus cognitive registration. Is there a preferred technique? Eur Urol 2017; 71:517-531.

36 Murphy DG, Grummet JP. Planning for the post-antibiotic era -why we must avoid TRUS-guided biopsy sampling. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13: 559-560.

37 Australian Government, Department of Health. MBS changes factsheet: transrectal prostate biopsy factsheet [updated 9 Oct 2020]. http://www.mbson line.gov.au/inter net/mbson line/publi shing.nsf/Conte nt/1C7B3 AED38 006462CA25 85E80 009D9 5C/$File/Facts heet-TRUSBiopsy.pdf (viewed Aug 2022).

38 Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 2016; 40: 244-252. 39 Van Leenders GJLH, van der Kwast TH, Grignon DJ, et al; ISUP Grading Workshop Panel Members. The 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2020; 44: e87-e99 40 Keefe DT, Schieda N, El Hallani S, et al. Cribriform morphology predicts upstaging after radical prostatectomy in patients with Gleason score 3 + 4 =7 prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided needle biopsy. Virchows Arch 2015; 467: 437-442.

41 Kweldam CF, Kümmerlin IP, Nieboer D, et al. Disease-specific survival of patients with invasive cribriform and intraductal prostate cancer at diagnostic biopsy. Mod Pathol 2016; 29: 630-636.

42 Briganti A, Karnes RJ, Gandaglia G, et al. Natural history of surgically treated high-risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2015; 33: e7-e13.

43 Briganti, A. Abdollah R, Nini A, et al. Performance characteristics of computed tomography in detecting lymph node metastases in contemporary patients with prostate cancer treated with extended pelvic lymph node dissection. Eur Urol 2012; 61:1132-1138.

44 Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, 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, multicentre study. Lancet 2020; 395: 1208-1216.