2024

PET Tumor Board: Case #4

In this discussion, E. David Crawford, MD, Professor of Urology and Jack A. Vickers Director of Prostate Research at the University of California, San Diego, leads a discussion of the case study of a healthy 80-year-old male with a history of BPH presenting with a rapid rise of PSA from a PSA of 3-4 ng/ml to 9.7 ng/ml and increased urgency and perception of difficulty fully voiding. He presents this case study to a panel of experts comprised of:
Wayne G. Brisbane, MD – Assistant Professor of Urology at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Phillip J. Koo, MD – Division Chief of Diagnostic Imaging and Northwest Region Oncology Physician Executive at the Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Daniel P. Petrylak, MD – Director of Genitourinary Oncology, Professor of Medicine and Urology, Co-Leader of Cancer Signaling Networks, and Co-Director of the Signal Transduction Program at Yale University Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut.
After revealing that the patient had a PSA of 7.2 ng/ml after a 4-week course of Cipro, Dr. Crawford tells the panel that his recommendation was for the patient to undergo an mpMRI, with possible biopsies. This revealed that the patient had a 65g prostate with a PI-RADS 5 lesion, and several suspicious pelvic nodes. After 12 core biopsies, each core had a Gleason Score of 4 or 5.
Dr. Crawford then asks the panel to weigh in on the next steps for imaging for the patient. Dr. Petrylak and Dr. Koo both recommend PSMA PET scanning over bone scans as the appropriate next step.
Dr. Crawford presents the results of the patient’s PSMA PET scan, which revealed extensive skeletal disease, to the panel. Dr. Petrylak recommends ADT, and debates the use of doublet or triplet therapy for the patient. Dr. Brisbane points out that the patient’s PSA level does not necessarily reflect the burden of disease, and Dr. Petrylak agrees.
Finally, the panel discusses the possibility of using PSMA PET scan for the primary. The panel is ambivalent, citing the lack of long-term data supporting its use in the primary.
This is the fourth in a series of discussions on PSMA PET supported by Blue Earth Diagnostics. For the first installment, click here. For the second installment, click here. For the third installment, click here.

Read More

Complications of Focal Therapy – Risk Factors, Timepoints, Management

Arvin K. George, MD, examines common complications from the use of focal therapy to treat prostate cancer and explores management strategies. In this presentation, he discusses the causes and management strategies for possible complications resulting from focal therapy, including:

Continence
Erectile and Sexual Dysfunction
Prostatic Abscesses
Rectourethral Fistulas
Urethral Sloughing
Urethral Strictures
Urinary Retention
Venous Thromboembolisms

Dr. George concludes by comparing the risks and benefits of focal therapy to those of HIFU and Cryoablation. He holds a Q+A session with the audience after his initial presentation.

Read More

Artificial Intelligence and Extended Reality for Urology Training

Nelson N. Stone, MD, explores the possible applications and current roadblocks of artificial intelligence (AI) and extended reality (XR) for urological training. He begins by outlining the need for more efficient methods of training urologists than training them exclusively on-site.

Dr. Stone discusses issues in traditional surgical training. He notes that the lack of proctors and the OR training model of “education by random opportunity” are not efficient methodologies.

Dr. Stone then outlines a theoretical model, called “Educational System for Instructorless Training” (ESIST), which incorporates XR and AI as an augmentation to proctor guidance during residency training. He acknowledges that neither XR or AI is at the point where they can replace proctors during residency training.

Dr. Stone concludes by presenting a video demonstration of what an ESIST program would look like in practice on a prostate phantom. After the demonstration, he encourages the audience to learn more about advancements in training at the 27th Annual Prostate Cancer Symposium, and conducting a brief Q+A with the audience.

Read More

In-Office Procedures and the ‘Scope’ of Practice for APPs

Terran W. Sims, NP, MSN, ACNP-C, CNN, COCN-C, discusses how to prepare and incorporate advanced practice providers (APPs) like nurse practitioners and physician assistants in urologic procedures. Ms. Sims begins by listing office procedures APPs might encounter, focusing on cystoscopy, stent removal, and difficult catheter insertion. She continues by posing a guiding question for her discussion: what is the best fit for APPs in practice?

Ms. Sims then briefly reviews differences in the scope of practice for APPs across the U.S., noting important state licensure requirements and highlighting the increasing presence of APP participation in urologic procedures. She emphasizes the American Urological Association’s (AUA) and Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates’ (SUNA) support for APP involvement, and utilizes cystoscopy as an example by detailing data that show increased levels of patient satisfaction as APPs have performed greater numbers of cystoscopy procedures.

Ms. Sims concludes by addressing the primary obstacles to additional APP role expansion: the lack of training and lack of standard curriculum. She encourages urologists to overcome these obstacles and invest in APPs by providing training, instilling confidence, and maintaining mentorship. She reiterates the benefits of APP involvement, including increased cost-effectiveness, profit margins, and team productivity.

Read More

Rise of the Machines: AI in Prostate MRI

Baris Turkbey, MD, explores the capabilities and training gaps of Artificial Intelligence in MRI prostate cancer detection. He begins by establishing the ubiquity of MRI technology in prostate cancer treatment across the globe and highlighting the shortcomings of previous and current guidelines on the use of MRI for disease detection.

Dr. Turkbey highlights the shortcomings of previous and current guidelines on the use of MRI for disease detection, noting that current data is too dependent on the experience of the practitioner. He then introduces the idea of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to standardize prostate cancer detection.

Dr. Turkbey then presents examples of AI successfully detecting prostate cancer lesions on MRI imaging. However, he cautions that more rigorous training and supervision is still needed for AI imaging, as AI has a high false-positive rate.

Dr. Turkbey concludes by examining the impact of image quality on AI performance, indicating that more training is required before these models can be deployed as a diagnostic aid. He presents data that demonstrates that low-quality images significantly impact the cancer detection rate of AI models.

Read More

Join the GRU Community

- Why Join? -