What’s been on the agenda at the annual meeting of the SUO?

The annual meeting of the Society for Urologic Oncology (SUO) has been been taking place in Washington, DC, over the past couple of days, and yesterday was devoted primarily to prostate cancer.

It isn’t possible for us to provide a thorough overview of all the presentations, but our friends at UroToday were at the meeting to do just that.

Below you will find a series of links to significant presentations given at this meeting. To look through the content of these links you will need to register as a member of the UroToday web site, but there is no cost associated with such registration.

  • Dr. Paul Pinsky of the National Cancer Institute spoke on the subject of, “Trials, trends, and models: synthesizing the evidence on prostate cancer screening.” He concluded that “what we need is ‘smarter screening’: knowing who to screen/biopsy and who to treat immediately or later. Shared decision making instead of universal screening is the key and the use of MRI to help us guide who to biopsy or not biopsy, should be encouraged.” This is a conclusion that The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink entirely supports.
  • Dr. Daniel Spratt of the University of Michigan reviewed data on, “Optimal timing of adjuvant and salvage radiation following radical prostatectomy.” His basic conclusion was that we need better biomarkers to be able to make better decisions about the use of adjuvant or early salvage therapy.
  • Dr. Daniel Bloom from the National Institutes of Health discussed, “Stratifying risk in localized prostate cancer,” with a particular emphasis on the role of multiparametric MRI scans in the detection of prostate cancer and the evaluation of risk. He argued that not only we can improve prostate cancer screening by using mpMRI; he said it also improves sensitivity for identification of clinically significant disease, and that it is a cost-effective process.
  • Dr. Daniel Lin from the University of Washington also looked at this topic in his presentation,”From biopsy, AS vs Rx: stratifying risk in localized PCa.” Dr. Lin was more focused on the role of different biomarkers in the selection of appropriate patients for active surveillance as opposed to active treatment.
  • Dr. Karim Marzouk of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center gave an interesting presentation on “Prostate cancer anxiety in men undergoing active surveillance.” He and his colleagues showed that, based on data from over 400 patients, most men on active surveillance will have at least moderate levels of anxiety, especially early on, but that such anxiety decreases significantly over time.
  • Dr. Hanan Goldberg of the University of Toronto gave a presentation entitled, “Can free PSA be used as a biomarker in biochemical recurrence to predict castrate resistant prostate cancer?” He and his co-authors concluded that this might well be the case in at least some patients. If so, this would be a highly cost-effective way of screening for risk of CRPC in men with biochemical recurrence after first-line therapy.
  • Dr. Robert E. Reiter from the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) reviewed what we currently know on the subject of “68Ga-PSMA imaging in prostate cancer and the promise of radio-ligands for targeted treatment.” As many regular readers will be aware, this is an important and evolving topic that is highly relevant to the effective preatment of progressive and advanced forms of prostate cancer.
  • Dr. Joseph Ippolito of Washington University School of Medicine spoke about “Advanced imaging in prostate cancer: PET/MRI of prostate cancer.” This type of technique is only going to be available at major academic medical centers for quite a while, and it is expensive at the present time, but it may represent an important area of future research.
  • There were also several other imaging-related presentations dealing with techniques that use choline-11, 18F-FACBC (Axumin), fluorinated PSMA-linked radiotracers, and a novel target called the VAPC-1 receptor

The “New” Prostate Cancer InfoLink thanks UroToday for their effective coverage of this increasingly important annual meeting of the SUO, and also the rapporteurs who provided the summaries of these papers for UroToday: Dr. Shreyas Joshi, Dr. David B. Cahn, Andres F. Correa, and Dr. Brian Kadow (all of the Fox Chase Cancer Center), and  Dr. Thenappan Chandrasekar and Dr. Hanan Goldberg (of the University of Toronto).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: