Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회지)

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Guidelines for Evaluating Treatment Response Based on Bone Scan for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial Working Group 3 Recommendations

전이성 거세 저항성 전립선암의 치료 반응 평가를 위한 뼈스캔 기반의 전이성 골병변 반응 평가 지침: Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial Working Group 3 권장사항

  • Ji Sung Jang (Biomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Amy Junghyun Lee (Trial Informatics Image, Clinical Operation Unit) ;
  • Kye Jin Park (Biomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Kyung Won Kim (Biomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Hyo Jung Park (Biomedical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center)
  • 장지성 (서울아산병원 아산생명과학연구원 의생명연구소) ;
  • 이정현 ;
  • 박계진 (서울아산병원 아산생명과학연구원 의생명연구소) ;
  • 김경원 (서울아산병원 아산생명과학연구원 의생명연구소) ;
  • 박효정 (서울아산병원 아산생명과학연구원 의생명연구소)
  • Received : 2023.05.23
  • Accepted : 2023.08.21
  • Published : 2023.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In prostate cancer, the bone is the most common site of metastasis, and it is essential to evaluate metastatic bone lesions to assess the tumor burden and treatment response. Castration-resistant prostate cancer refers to the state wherein the cancer continues to progress despite a significant reduction of the sex hormone level and is associated with frequent distant metastasis. The Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 (PCWG3) released guidelines that aimed to standardize the assessment of treatment effects in castration-resistant prostate cancer using bone scintigraphy. However, these guidelines can be challenging to comprehend and implement in practical settings. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of a specific image acquisition method and treatment response assessment for bone scintigraphy-based evaluation of bone lesions in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, in accordance with the PCWG3 guidelines.

전립선암에서 뼈는 가장 흔한 전이병소이며, 전립선암의 질병 상태를 파악하고 치료 반응을 평가하기 위해서는 전이성 골병변의 평가가 필수적이다. 거세 저항성 전립선암은 남성호르몬을 거세 수치로 떨어뜨렸음에도 불구하고 암이 진행하는 상태를 의미하며, 이 상태에서는 원격 전이가 빈번하게 발생한다. 거세 저항성 전립선암의 치료 반응을 객관적으로 평가하기 위해 뼈스캔을 기반으로 한 Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 (이하 PCWG3) 가이드라인이 발표되었으나 실제 이를 쉽게 숙지하여 적용하기에는 어려운 점이 있다. 본 종설에서 PCWG3 가이드라인에 준한 거세 저항성 전립선암의 뼈스캔 기반 골병변 반응 평가를 위한 구체적인 영상 획득 방법 및 치료 반응 평가법을 소개하고자 한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grants funded by the Korea government (No. NRF-2021R1A2B5B03001891).

References

  1. Jung KW, Won YJ, Oh CM, Kong HJ, Cho H, Lee DH, et al. Prediction of cancer incidence and mortality in Korea, 2015. Cancer Res Treat 2015;47:142-148
  2. Loblaw DA, Virgo KS, Nam R, Somerfield MR, Ben-Josef E, Mendelson DS, et al. Initial hormonal management of androgen-sensitive metastatic, recurrent, or progressive prostate cancer: 2006 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1596-1605
  3. Loblaw DA, Mendelson DS, Talcott JA, Virgo KS, Somerfield MR, Ben-Josef E, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations for the initial hormonal management of androgen-sensitive metastatic, recurrent, or progressive prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2927-2941
  4. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. [EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer]. Actas Urol Esp 2011;35:565-579. Spanish
  5. Seidenfeld J, Samson DJ, Aronson N, Albertson PC, Bayoumi AM, Bennett C, et al. Relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of methods of androgen suppression in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 1999;4:i-x, 1-246, I1-36
  6. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014;65:467-479
  7. Scher HI, Halabi S, Tannock I, Morris M, Sternberg CN, Carducci MA, et al. Design and end points of clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1148-1159
  8. Lorente D, Mateo J, Perez-Lopez R, de Bono JS, Attard G. Sequencing of agents in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:e279-e292
  9. Tucci M, Scagliotti GV, Vignani F. Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: time for innovation. Future Oncol 2015;11:91-106
  10. Kawai AT, Martinez D, Saltus CW, Vassilev ZP, Soriano-Gabarro M, Kaye JA. Incidence of skeletal-related events in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: an observational retrospective cohort study in the US. Prostate Cancer 2019;2019:5971615
  11. Hong S, Youk T, Lee SJ, Kim KM, Vajdic CM. Bone metastasis and skeletal-related events in patients with solid cancer: a Korean nationwide health insurance database study. PLoS One 2020;15:e0234927
  12. Howard LE, De Hoedt AM, Aronson WJ, Kane CJ, Amling CL, Cooperberg MR, et al. Do skeletal-related events predict overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer? Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2016;19:380-384
  13. Jayasekera J, Onukwugha E, Bikov K, Mullins CD, Seal B, Hussain A. The economic burden of skeletal-related events among elderly men with metastatic prostate cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2014;32:173-191
  14. Ryan CJ, Saylor PJ, Everly JJ, Sartor O. Bone-targeting radiopharmaceuticals for the treatment of bone-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: exploring the implications of new data. Oncologist 2014;19:1012-1018
  15. Norgaard M, Jensen AO, Jacobsen JB, Cetin K, Fryzek JP, Sorensen HT. Skeletal related events, bone metastasis and survival of prostate cancer: a population based cohort study in Denmark (1999 to 2007). J Urol 2010;184:162-167
  16. Bubley GJ, Carducci M, Dahut W, Dawson N, Daliani D, Eisenberger M, et al. Eligibility and response guidelines for phase II clinical trials in androgen-independent prostate cancer: recommendations from the Prostate-Specific Antigen Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:3461-3467
  17. Scher HI, Morris MJ, Stadler WM, Higano C, Basch E, Fizazi K, et al. Trial design and objectives for castrationresistant prostate cancer: updated recommendations from the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:1402-1418
  18. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247
  19. Liu Y, Litiere S, de Vries EG, Sargent D, Shankar L, Bogaerts J, et al. The role of response evaluation criteria in solid tumour in anticancer treatment evaluation: results of a survey in the oncology community. Eur J Cancer 2014;50:260-266
  20. Spratt DE, Zumsteg ZS, Feng FY, Tomlins SA. Translational and clinical implications of the genetic landscape of prostate cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2016;13:597-610
  21. Van den Wyngaert T, Strobel K, Kampen WU, Kuwert T, van der Bruggen W, Mohan HK, et al. The EANM practice guidelines for bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:1723-1738
  22. Bartel TB, Kuruva M, Gnanasegaran G, Beheshti M, Cohen EJ, Weissman AF, et al. SNMMI procedure standard for bone scintigraphy 4.0. J Nucl Med Technol 2018;46:398-404
  23. Beer TM, Armstrong AJ, Rathkopf DE, Loriot Y, Sternberg CN, Higano CS, et al. Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 2014;371:424-433
  24. Ryan CJ, Smith MR, de Bono JS, Molina A, Logothetis CJ, de Souza P, et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 2013;368:138-148
  25. Fizazi K, Jones R, Oudard S, Efstathiou E, Saad F, de Wit R, et al. Phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial comparing orteronel (TAK-700) plus prednisone with placebo plus prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that has progressed during or after docetaxel-based therapy: ELM-PC 5. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:723-731
  26. Conteduca V, Poti G, Caroli P, Russi S, Brighi N, Lolli C, et al. Flare phenomenon in prostate cancer: recent evidence on new drugs and next generation imaging. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2021;13:1758835920987654
  27. Smith PH, Bono A, Calais da Silva F, Debruyne F, Denis L, Robinson P, et al. Some limitations of the radioisotope bone scan in patients with metastatic prostatic cancer. A subanalysis of EORTC trial 30853. The EORTC Urological Group. Cancer 1990;66(5 Suppl):1009-1016
  28. Cook GJ, Venkitaraman R, Sohaib AS, Lewington VJ, Chua SC, Huddart RA, et al. The diagnostic utility of the flare phenomenon on bone scintigraphy in staging prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:7-13
  29. Lee S, Shi H, Sohn S, Park S, Wang S, Song J, et al. The flare phenomenon in a patient with advanced gastric cancer with bone metastases. Korean J Med 2016;91:321-324
  30. Janicek MJ, Hayes DF, Kaplan WD. Healing flare in skeletal metastases from breast cancer. Radiology 1994;192:201-204
  31. Macedo F, Ladeira K, Pinho F, Saraiva N, Bonito N, Pinto L, et al. Bone metastases: an overview. Oncol Rev 2017;11:321
  32. Manohar PR, Rather TA, Khan SH, Malik D. Skeletal metastases presenting as superscan on technetium 99m methylene diphosphonate whole body bone scintigraphy in different type of cancers: a 5-year retro-prospective study. World J Nucl Med 2017;16:39-44
  33. Brenner AI, Koshy J, Morey J, Lin C, DiPoce J. The bone scan. Semin Nucl Med 2012;42:11-26
  34. Liu Y. Super-superscan on a bone scintigraphy. Clin Nucl Med 2011;36:227-228
  35. Love C, Din AS, Tomas MB, Kalapparambath TP, Palestro CJ. Radionuclide bone imaging: an illustrative review. Radiographics 2003;23:341-358
  36. Buckley O, O'Keeffe S, Geoghegan T, Lyburn ID, Munk PL, Worsley D, et al. 99mTc bone scintigraphy superscans: a review. Nucl Med Commun 2007;28:521-527