PET guidance in prostate cancer radiotherapy: Quantitative imaging to predict response and guide treatment

Positron emission tomography (PET) allows a monitoring and recording of the spatial and temporal distribution of molecular/cellular processes for diagnostic and therapeutic applications.The aim of this review is to describe the current applications and to explore the role of PET in prostate cancer management, mainly in the radiation therapy (RT) scenario.The state-of-the art of PET for prostate cancer will be presented together with the impact of new specific PET tracers and technological developments aiming at obtaining better imaging quality, increased tumor detectability and more accurate volume delineation.An increased number of studies have been focusing on PET quantification methods as predictive biomarkers capable of guiding individualized treatment and improving patient outcome; the sophisticated advanced intensity modulated and imaged guided radiation therapy techniques (IMRT/IGRT) are capable of boosting more radioresistant tumor (sub)volumes.The use of advanced feature analyses of PET images is an approach that holds great promise with regard to several oncological diseases, but needs further validation in managing prostate diseases.     

Targeted treatment of prostate cancer

Over a half century ago, Charles Huggins demonstrated the response of prostate cancer to androgen deprivation therapy. Subsequently, many discoveries and evolving findings continued to support a research rationale focused on the androgen receptor (AR) as a key target for prostate cancer. More recently, preliminary trials have suggested that other targets could also be useful in the treatment of prostate cancer, and the proposed strategies for treatment have ranged from targeted toxins to immunotherapeutic agents. We provide an overview of some of these approaches, with an emphasis on those that employ prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) as a target.     

Endocrine treatment of prostate cancer

Although androgen deprivation as a treatment for patients with prostate cancer was described more than 60 years ago its optimal use remains controversial. The widespread use of prostate-specific (PSA) assay has lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier detection of recurrent disease. This means that the systemic side effects of androgen deprivation and quality of life have become more important. Debates continue regarding the proper use and timing of endocrine therapy with orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists, gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, GnRH antagonists, and androgen antagonists. A critical review of the literature was performed. Data support that androgen deprivation is an effective treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. However, although it improves survival, it is not curative, and creates a spectrum of unwanted effects that influence quality of life. Castration remains the frontline treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, where orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists and GnRH agonists produce equivalent clinical responses. Maximum androgen blockade (MAB) is not significantly more effective than single agent GnRH agonist or orchiectomy. Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy is as effective as castration in treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer offering quality of life benefits. Adjuvant endocrine treatment is able to delay disease progression at any stage. There is, however, controversy of the possible survival benefit of such treatment, including patients having PSA relapse after definitive local treatment for prostate cancer. Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment has its place mainly in the external beam radiotherapy setting. Intermittent androgen blockade is still considered experimental. The decision regarding the type of androgen deprivation should be made individually after informing the patient of all available treatment options, including watchful waiting, and on the basis of potential benefits and adverse effects. Several large studies are under way to investigate the role of adjuvant endocrine treatment in the field of early prostate cancer, intermittent androgen deprivation and endocrine therapy alone compared with endocrine therapy with radiotherapy. The real challenge, however, is to develop better means to avert hormone-refractory prostate cancer and better treatments for patients with hormone-refractory disease when it occurs.     

The treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer: docetaxel and beyond

Two randomized clinical trials demonstrated a survival benefit of 20% to 24% with docetaxel-based therapy when compared with survival with mitoxantrone and prednisone after failure of androgen ablation therapy. These studies supported the approval of docetaxel-based therapy for the treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer by the US Food and Drug Administration in May 2005. Clinical trials in hormone-refractory prostate cancer are now focused on building on the survival improvement seen with docetaxel-based therapy. This article presents a summary of some of the more promising treatments and regimens for advanced prostate cancer.