Abstract
Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) allows for the combined use of metabolic or functional imaging information obtained from PET with the anatomical and functional imaging information from MRI. PET/MRI offers several advantages, such as improved local tumor (T) staging due to superior soft tissue resolution of MRI, fewer fusion artifacts compared to PET/computerized tomography (PET/CT) in organs with changing volumes or motion, and reduced exposure to ionizing radiation. Most studies on the use of PET/MRI for prostate cancer have focused on its indications for detecting primary lesions, T staging, and detecting local recurrence. In these indications, PET/MRI presents a better alternative compared to PET/CT or MRI alone. However, there are limited studies on the use of PET/MRI for nodal and metastatic staging in prostate cancer, and it has not demonstrated a significant advantage over PET/CT. There are few clinical studies on the use of PET/MRI in bladder cancer, but it has been shown to have higher accuracy than MRI alone in detecting primary tumors and lymph node or organ metastases. Limited studies on renal cell carcinoma, which is the most common primary kidney malignancy, suggest that PET/MRI holds promise for distinguishing renal lesions. There is insufficient research on the use of PET/MRI for testicular and penile cancers, so these tumors are not covered in the current review.
Keywords: Positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, urologic neoplasms, prostatic neoplasms, urinary bladder neoplasms, kidney neoplasms
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of ıncidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209-249.
Ergin I. Dünyada ve Türkiye’de güncel kanser istatistikleri. In: Ozenturk M, editor. Kanser kontrolü ve disiplinlerarası yaklaşım. 1st Edition. Ankara: Türkiye Klinikleri; 2021. P. 6–10.
D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998;280:969-974.
Pokorny MR, de Rooij M, Duncan E, et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol. 2014;66:22-29.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2. Eur Urol. 2019;76:340-351.
Bakır B, Tuğcu V, Binbay M, et al. Prostat kanserinde multiparametrik manyetik rezonans görüntüleme ve hedefe yönelik biyopsi kılavuzu. Türk Üroloji Derneği.
Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E, et al. Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. Eur Urol. 2015;67:569-576.
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative ıntent. Eur Urol. 2021;79:243-262.
Panebianco V, Barchetti G, Simone G, et al. Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance ımaging for prostate cancer: what's next? Eur Urol. 2018;74:48-54.
Bjurlin MA, Meng X, Le Nobin J, et al. Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment. J Urol. 2014;192:648-658.
Ferda J, Hes O, Hora M, et al. Assessment of prostate carcinoma aggressiveness: relation to 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET/MRI and gleason score. anticancer res. 2023;43:449-453.
Zhao Y, Simpson BS, Morka N, et al. Comparison of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography imaging in primary prostate cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14:3497.
Eiber M, Weirich G, Holzapfel K, et al. Simultaneous 68Ga-PSMA HBED-CC PET/MRI improves the localization of primary prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2016;70:829-836.
Evangelista L, Zattoni F, Cassarino G, et al. PET/MRI in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:859-873.
Li M, Huang Z, Yu H, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Song B. Comparison of PET/MRI with multiparametric MRI in diagnosis of primary prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2019;113:225-231.
Schaeffer EM, Srinivas S, Adra N, et al. NCCN Guidelines® ınsights: prostate cancer, version 1.2023. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20:1288-1298.
Muehlematter UJ, Burger IA, Becker AS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI versus 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI for extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle ınvasion in patients with prostate cancer. Radiology. 2019;293:350-358.
Kimura S, Urabe F, Sasaki H, Kimura T, Miki K, Egawa S. Prognostic significance of prostate-specific antigen persistence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13:948.
Ploussard G, Fossati N, Wiegel T, et al. Management of persistently elevated prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol Oncol. 2021;4:150-169.
Shore ND, Moul JW, Pienta KJ, Czernin J, King MT, Freedland SJ. Biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer after primary definitive therapy: treatment based on risk stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2024;27:192-201.
Duan H, Iagaru A. PSMA PET for detection of recurrence. Semin Nucl Med. 2024;54:77-86.
Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on prostate cancer. part II-2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;79:263-282.
Panebianco V, Turkbey B. Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer recurrence: it's time for precision diagnostic with Prostate Imaging for Recurrence Reporting (PI-RR) score. Eur Radiol. 2023;33:748-751.
Pecoraro M, Turkbey B, Purysko AS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and observer agreement of the MRI prostate ımaging for recurrence reporting assessment score. Radiology. 2022;304:342-350.
Jeet V, Parkinson B, Song R, Sharma R, Hoyle M. Histopathologically validated diagnostic accuracy of PSMA-PET/CT in the primary and secondary staging of prostate cancer and the impact of PSMA-PET/CT on clinical management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Semin Nucl Med. 2023;53:706-718.
Subiela JD, Gomis Sellés E, Maldonado A, et al. Clinical usefulness of prostate-specific membrane antigen-ligand positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of prostate cancer biochemical recurrence after primary radiation therapy in patients with prostate-specific antigen below the phoenix threshold: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2023;35:e676-e688.
Fennessy N, Lee J, Shin J, et al. Frusemide aids diagnostic interpretation of 68 Ga-PSMA positron emission tomography/CT in men with prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2017;61:739-744.
Mao J, Gao M, Cui B, et al. Super early scan of PSMA PET/CT in evaluating primary and metastatic lesions of prostate cancer. molecules. 2022;27:4661.
Giesel FL, Hadaschik B, Cardinale J, et al. F-18 labelled PSMA-1007: biodistribution, radiation dosimetry and histopathological validation of tumor lesions in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:678-688.
Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy is at risk to be missed in 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET of PET/CT and PET/MRI: comparison with mpMRI integrated in simultaneous PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:776-787.
Guberina N, Hetkamp P, Ruebben H, et al. Whole-body integrated [68Ga]PSMA-11-PET/MR imaging in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: comparison with whole-body PET/CT as the standard of reference. Mol Imaging Biol. 2020;22:788-796.
Jannusch K, Bruckmann NM, Morawitz J, et al. Recurrent prostate cancer: combined role for MRI and PSMA-PET in 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI. Eur Radiol. 2024;34:4789-4800.
Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395:1208-1216.
Asa S, Ozgur E, Uslu-Besli L, et al. Hybrid Ga-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen PET/MRI in the detection of skeletal metastasis in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: Contribution of each part to the diagnostic performance. Nucl Med Commun. 2023;44:65-73.
Gontero P, Birtle A, Capoun O, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (TaT1 and carcinoma in situ)-a summary of the 2024 guidelines update. Eur Urol. 2024:S0302-2838(24)02514-4.
Flaig TW, Spiess PE, Chair V, et al. NCCN Guidelines version 4.2024 bladder cancer [Internet]. 2024. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/home/member-
Powles T, Bellmunt J, Comperat E, et al. Bladder cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:244-258.
Panebianco V, Narumi Y, Altun E, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for bladder cancer: development of VI-RADS (Vesical Imaging-Reporting And Data System). Eur Urol. 2018;74:294-306.
Nicola R, Pecoraro M, Lucciola S, et al. VI-RADS score system - a primer for urologists. Int Braz J Urol. 2022;48:609-622.
Woo S, Panebianco V, Narumi Y, et al. Diagnostic Performance of Vesical Imaging Reporting and Data System for the prediction of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2020;3:306-315.
Luo C, Huang B, Wu Y, Chen J, Chen L. Use of Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) for detecting the muscle invasion of bladder cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2020;30:4606-4614.
Alfred Witjes J, Max Bruins H, Carrión A, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: summary of the 2023 Guidelines. Eur Urol. 2024;85:17-31.
Akkaş BE. The Use of F-18-FDG PET/CT in renal and bladder tumors. Nucl Med Semin. 2019;5:199-206.
Altun E. MR Imaging of the urinary bladder: added value of PET-MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2019;27:105-115.
Ha HK, Koo PJ, Kim SJ. Diagnostic accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT for preoperative lymph node staging in newly diagnosed bladder cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncology. 2018;95:31-38.
Einerhand SMH, van Gennep EJ, Mertens LS, et al. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2020;30:654-664.
Li Y, Yang ZQ, Ye H, Qi L, Hu JW. Application of (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging in diagnosing bladder tumor metastasis lesions. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2013;33:234-237.
Soubra A, Gencturk M, Froelich J, et al. FDG-PET/CT for assessing the Response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in bladder cancer patients. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018;16:360-364.
Xue M, Liu L, Du G, Fu Z. Diagnostic Evaluation of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging in recurrent or residual urinary bladder cancer: a meta-analysis. Urol J. 2020;17:562-567.
Alongi P, Caobelli F, Gentile R, et al. Recurrent bladder carcinoma: clinical and prognostic role of 18 F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:224-233.
Galgano SJ, Porter KK, Burgan C, Rais-Bahrami S. The role of imaging in bladder cancer diagnosis and staging. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10:703.
Rosenkrantz AB, Friedman KP, Ponzo F, et al. Prospective pilot study to evaluate the incremental value of PET information in patients with bladder cancer undergoing 18F-FDG simultaneous PET/MRI. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42:e8-e15.
Eulitt PJ, Altun E, Sheikh A, et al. Pilot study of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for staging of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020;18:378-386
Civelek AC, Niglio SA, Malayeri AA, et al. Clinical value of 18FDG PET/MRI in muscle-invasive, locally advanced, and metastatic bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2021;39:787.e17-787.e21.
Li T, You Q, Zhang S, et al. Performance of 18F-FDG PET/MRI and its parameters in staging and neoadjuvant therapy response evaluation in bladder cancer. iScience. 2024;27:109657.
Muglia VF, Prando A. Renal cell carcinoma: histological classification and correlation with imaging findings. Radiol Bras. 2015;48:166-174.
Caoili EM, Davenport MS. Role of percutaneous needle biopsy for renal masses. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2014;31:20-26.
Razik A, Das CJ, Sharma S. PET-CT and PET-MR in urological cancers other than prostate cancer: An update on state of the art. Indian J Urol. 2018;34:20-27.
Wang HY, Ding HJ, Chen JH, et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG-PET and PET/CT in renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Imaging. 2012;12:464-474.
Ma H, Shen G, Liu B, Yang Y, Ren P, Kuang A. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT in restaging renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38:156-163.
Kitajima K, Yamamoto S, Fukushima K, Minamimoto R, Kamai T, Jadvar H. Update on advances in molecular PET in urological oncology. Jpn J Radiol. 2016;34:470-85.
Ferda J, Ferdova E, Hora M, et al. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in potentially advanced renal cell carcinoma: a role in treatment decisions and prognosis estimation. Anticancer Res. 2013;33:2665-2672.
Tatar G, Gündoğan C, Şahin ÖF, Arslan E, Ergül N, Çermik TF. Prognostic significance of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging in survival outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2022;31:200-206.
Schuster DM, Votaw JR, Nieh PT, et al. Initial experience with the radiotracer anti-1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid with PET/CT in prostate carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:56-63.
Oyama N, Takahara N, Hasegawa Y, et al. Assessment of therapeutic effect of sunitinib by (11)C-acetate PET compared with FDG PET imaging in a patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;45:217-219.
Middendorp M, Maute L, Sauter B, Vogl TJ, Grünwald F. Initial experience with 18F-fluoroethylcholine PET/CT in staging and monitoring therapy response of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2010;24:441-446.
Horn KP, Yap JT, Agarwal N, et al. FDG and FLT-PET for Early measurement of response to 37.5 mg daily sunitinib therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Imaging. 2015;15:15.
Hugonnet F, Fournier L, Medioni J, et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma: relationship between initial metastasis hypoxia, change after 1 month's sunitinib, and therapeutic response: an 18F-fluoromisonidazole PET/CT study. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1048-1055.
Muselaers S, Erdem S, Bertolo R, et al. PSMA PET/CT in renal cell carcinoma: an overview of current literature. J Clin Med. 2022;11:1829.
Yin Q, Xu H, Zhong Y, Ni J, Hu S. Diagnostic performance of MRI, SPECT, and PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. 2022;22:163.
Schaarschmidt BM, Grueneisen J, Heusch P, et al. Does 18F-FDG PET/MRI reduce the number of indeterminate abdominal incidentalomas compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT? Nucl Med Commun. 2015;36:588-595.
Kelly-Morland C, Rudman S, Nathan P, et al. Evaluation of treatment response and resistance in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) using integrated 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI); The REMAP study. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:392.
Manickavasagar T, Kelly-Morland C, Rudman S, et al. REMAP: response evaluation in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) using 18F-FDG PET/MRI. Clin Oncol. 2024;36:e81–e82.
Antunes J, Viswanath S, Rusu M, et al. Radiomics analysis on FLT-PET/MRI for characterization of early treatment response in renal cell carcinoma: a proof-of-concept study. Transl Oncol. 2016;9:155-162.
Yin Q, Hung S-C, Wang L, et al. Associations between tumor vascularity, vascular endothelial growth factor expression and PET/MRI radiomic signatures in primary clear-cell-renal-cell-carcinoma: proof-of-concept Study. Sci Rep. 2017;7:43356.
