20/01/2022
Prostate cancer and new diagnostic imaging techniques to assess its extent
Prostate cancer is the most common in men over 50 years of age and a clear, early diagnosis can make a huge difference.
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men and tends to be diagnosed from the age of 50. As for all types of cancer, determining their extent precisely is crucial: a cancer located entirely within the affected organ can, in fact, be completely removed by surgery; on the contrary, if it leaves the confines of the affected part of the body or, even worse, if it spreads with distant metastases through the blood, for example, other therapeutic strategies need to be considered. We can therefore understand that defining the extent of cancer, through reliable diagnostic means, is absolutely important. For example, in the case of the prostate, investigations such as CT scans and bone scinti scans are usually carried out to decide on the therapeutic pathway and, if these show that the tumour is localized, surgery or radiation therapy can be performed.
Alternative diagnostic imaging techniques
Despite a very high level of attention to patient selection and the choice of the best treatment for each patient, recurrences of the neoplasm are frequent, and this may be partially due to an insufficient ability of the tests used to detect non-localized prostate cancer. To overcome these possible limitations, some more recent diagnostic imaging techniques could help us with their increased ability to define the extent of the disease. We are talking about “PMSA PET-CT”: a test that detects the presence of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PMSA), a protein that only prostate cancer cells express in an increased way. In other words, if greater expression of this molecule is detected on the cell membrane, it is most likely to be prostate cancer. The most recent evidence suggests that this technique does indeed have great advantages, but the data mostly refer to cases of recurrent cancer (i.e., cancer that has already been treated once but then, for different reasons, comes back). We do not know though whether it is actually superior to the methods generally used for the staging of first-diagnosis prostate cancer. In short, understanding whether the use of this technology is advantageous in this disease even for the first diagnosis of the disease could be very important, all the more so considering the fact that, as we said, some recurrences most likely result from an insufficient ability of conventional methods to understand how widespread the disease diagnosed for the first time actually is.