MP51-18 TRENDS OF PRIMARY STAGING FOR NEWLY DIAGNOSED PROSTATE CANCER – ASSESSING THE UPTAKE OF PROSTATE SPECIFIC MEMBRANE ANTIGEN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY: A POPULATION BASED ANALYSIS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP51-18 TRENDS OF PRIMARY STAGING FOR NEWLY DIAGNOSED PROSTATE CANCER – ASSESSING THE UPTAKE OF PROSTATE SPECIFIC MEMBRANE ANTIGEN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY: A POPULATION BASED ANALYSIS Marlon Perera, Nathan Papa, Declan Murphy, Nathan Lawrentschuk, Melanie Evans, Jeremy Millar, and Damien Bolton Marlon PereraMarlon Perera More articles by this author , Nathan PapaNathan Papa More articles by this author , Declan MurphyDeclan Murphy More articles by this author , Nathan LawrentschukNathan Lawrentschuk More articles by this author , Melanie EvansMelanie Evans More articles by this author , Jeremy MillarJeremy Millar More articles by this author , and Damien BoltonDamien Bolton More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002626.18AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) in advanced prostate cancer imaging demonstrates improved sensitivity and specificity compared to conventional imaging. We aimed to assess prostate cancer staging practice patterns in Victoria, Australia using population-based data. METHODS: We extracted data on men with a tissue diagnosis of prostate cancer between January 2017 and December 2019 from the Victorian Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (PCOR-Vic). We evaluated trends and comparisons between patients receiving PET/CT (with or without conventional imaging (CImg)), and CImg alone, and analysed imaging modality as predictor of clinical regional node positive disease (cN1 vs cN0/X), metastatic disease (cM1 vs cM0/X), and treatment received. RESULTS: In total, 10288 patients in the registry had either a staging PET scan (n = 1599, 16%), CImg without PET scan (n = 3539, 34%), or no recorded PET or CImg (n = 5150, 50%). The proportion of all imaged patients who received staging PET increased from 21% to 39% from the first to last six-month period, and in the patients with grade group ≥3, the increase was 23-43%. After adjustment for grade group, PET vs CImg-only patients were observed to have a higher proportion of cN1 disease (OR = 2.48, 95% CI: 2.04-3.03) but not cM1 disease (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.87-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Our registry data highlights the rapid uptake of PET imaging, particularly in higher grade disease. Based on this data, we underline the increased diagnosis of nodal disease, thus potentially optimizing patient selection prior to definitive treatment for prostate cancer. Source of Funding: Marlon Perera is sponsored by the Australian-America Fulbright Commission administered through a 2021-2022 Fulbright Future Scholarship funded by The Kinghorn Foundation © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e883 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Marlon Perera More articles by this author Nathan Papa More articles by this author Declan Murphy More articles by this author Nathan Lawrentschuk More articles by this author Melanie Evans More articles by this author Jeremy Millar More articles by this author Damien Bolton More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...