Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Staging in prostate cancer.

Beverley A Wilkinson1, Freddie C Hamdy

  • 11 Floor, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Rd, Sheffield, S10 2JF, UK. b.a.wilkinson@sheffield.ac.uk

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy
|July 13, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Genomic Prostate Score for Identifying Biologically Low-risk Disease in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Active Surveillance, Surgery, or Radiotherapy.

European urology oncology·2026
Same author

3D pathology-guided microdissection.

Nature methods·2026
Same author

Radical Prostatectomy in Low-volume Metastatic Prostate Cancer? The Need for New Evidence.

European urology·2026
Same author

Delphi consensus on ex vivo fluorescence confocal microscopy in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

BJU international·2026
Same author

Long-term outcomes of cribriform-positive and cribriform-negative prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy in the ProtecT trial.

BJU international·2026
Same author

Flourine-18 Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-1007 Positron Emission Tomography Imaging in Staging of Primary and Secondary Prostate Cancer-A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

JU open plus·2026
Same journal

Predictive biomarkers of response in metastatic prostate cancer: paving the way for a new era of precision medicine.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
Same journal

Barriers to the use of brachytherapy for treatment of cervical cancer and prostate cancer in low- and middle-income countries.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
Same journal

The dual role of Schlafen11 in brain tumors: Jekyll and Hyde.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
Same journal

Central nervous system-related permanent consequences in long-term survivors of pediatric Langerhans cell histiocytosis: a clinical overview and monitoring strategies.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
Same journal

RTsDEN: reverse task attention enabled deep learning model for lung cancer detection using computed tomography.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
Same journal

The potential impact of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists for the treatment of endometrial carcinoma.

Expert review of anticancer therapy·2026
See all related articles

This review covers current prostate cancer staging methods, detailing their pros and cons. It highlights emerging techniques likely to advance future prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Medical Imaging
  • Urology

Background:

  • Accurate prostate cancer staging is crucial for effective treatment planning.
  • Conventional methods have limitations in precision and patient outcomes.
  • Advancements in imaging and molecular techniques offer improved staging capabilities.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review current prostate cancer staging techniques.
  • To analyze the advantages and limitations of each modality.
  • To identify areas of rapid progress and future development in prostate cancer staging.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review of established and emerging prostate cancer staging modalities.
  • Comparative analysis of diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and clinical utility.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Focus on techniques with significant ongoing research and development.

    • Main Results:

    • Conventional techniques like digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, and biopsy have defined roles but also limitations.
    • Advanced imaging techniques such as MRI and PET scans show promise for improved detection and characterization of disease extent.
    • Molecular markers and genomic assays are emerging as potential tools for more precise risk stratification.

    Conclusions:

    • Current prostate cancer staging relies on a combination of methods with inherent strengths and weaknesses.
    • Emerging technologies in imaging and molecular diagnostics are poised to significantly enhance the accuracy and effectiveness of prostate cancer staging.
    • Continued research and validation are essential for integrating novel techniques into routine clinical practice for better patient management.