Application of bone scans for prostate cancer staging: Which guideline shows better result?

Authors

  • Ari Chong Chosun University Hospital
  • Insang Hwang Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Jung-min Ha Chosun University Hospital
  • Seong Hyeon Yu Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Eu Chang Hwang Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Ho Song Yu Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Sun Ouck Kim Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Seung-Il Jung Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Taek Won Kang Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Dong Deuk Kwon Chonnam National University Hospital
  • Kwangsung Park Chonnam National University Hospital

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2054

Keywords:

prostate cancer, bone scintigraphy, staging

Abstract

Introduction: We evaluated the accuracy of current guidelines by analyzing bone scan results and clinical parameters of patients with prostate cancer to determine the optimal guideline for predicting bone metastasis.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer and who underwent a bone scan. Bone metastasis was confirmed by bone scan results with clinical and radiological follow-up. Serum prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, percent of positive biopsy core, clinical staging and bone scan results were analyzed. We analyzed diagnostic performance in predicting bone metastasis of the guidelines of the European Association of Urology (EAU), American Urological Association (AUA), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as well as Briganti’s classification and regression tree (CART). We also compared the percent of positive biopsy core between patients with and without bone metastases.

Results: A total 167 of 806 patients had bone metastases. Receiver operating curve analysis revealed that the AUA and EAU guidelines were better for detecting bone metastases than were Briganti’s CART and NCCN. No significant difference was observed between AUA and EAU guidelines. Patients with bone metastases had a higher percent positive core than did patients without metastasis (the cut-off value >55.6).

Conclusion: The EAU and AUA guidelines showed better results than did Briganti’s CART and NCCN for predicting bone metastasis in the enrolled patients. A bone scan is strongly recommended for patients who have a higher percent positive core and who meet the EAU and AUA guidelines.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ari Chong, Chosun University Hospital

Department of Nuclear Medicine

Insang Hwang, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Jung-min Ha, Chosun University Hospital

Department of Nuclear Medicine

Seong Hyeon Yu, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Eu Chang Hwang, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Ho Song Yu, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Seung-Il Jung, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Taek Won Kang, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Dong Deuk Kwon, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Kwangsung Park, Chonnam National University Hospital

Department of Urology

Downloads

Published

2014-08-11

How to Cite

Chong, A., Hwang, I., Ha, J.- min, Yu, S. H., Hwang, E. C., Yu, H. S., Kim, S. O., Jung, S.-I., Kang, T. W., Kwon, D. D., & Park, K. (2014). Application of bone scans for prostate cancer staging: Which guideline shows better result?. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 8(7-8), e515–9. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2054

Issue

Section

Original Research