Clinical Aspects and Investigations in Genitourinary Cancer

  • Pradeep Durai
  • Qing Hui Wu
  • Edmund Chiong
Living reference work entry


Genitourinary cancer is an important topic in the current era. Understanding the disease is important to tailor the treatment for individual patients. Clinical aspects and investigations are part and parcel in cancer diagnosis. Genitourinary cancer encompasses multiple cancers but five important cancers are discussed in this chapter. This includes renal cell carcinoma, prostate cancer, urothelial cancer, testicular cancer and penile cancer. Other subtypes or variants are beyond the scope of this chapter. This chapter is to encourage the readers to better understand the clinical aspects and investigations that are commonly used in genitourinary cancer.

Investigations play a major role in diagnosis of genitourinary cancer. Understanding the principles of the imaging is important to appreciate and interpret a particular imaging modality. The principles of the imaging are mentioned at the start of the chapter. We have placed the clinical aspects and investigations for individual cancers mentioned above and tailored the topics to include appropriate investigations and salient features to take note in the imaging.


  1. Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and (18)F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(1):11–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Albers P. EAU guidelines on testicular-cancer. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  3. Ascenti G, et al. Contrast-enhanced second-harmonic sonography in the detection of pseudocapsule in renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182(6):1525–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayyıldız SN, Ayyıldız A. PSA, PSA derivatives, proPSA and prostate health index in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Turk J Urol. 2014;40(2):82–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Behesnilian AS, Reiter RE. Risk stratification of prostate cancer in the modern era. Curr Opin Urol. 2015;25(3):246–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonekamp D, et al. Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics. 2011;31(3):677–703.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bott S, Patel U, Djavan B, Caroll PR. Images in urology. In: Images in urology. London/New York: Springer; 2012.Google Scholar
  8. Brogsitter C, Zophel K, Kotzerke J. 18F-Choline, 11C-choline and 11C-acetate PET/CT: comparative analysis for imaging prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(Suppl 1):S18–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brosman SA. Penile cancer. 2015 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  10. Brown FM. Urine cytology. It is still the gold standard for screening? Urol Clin North Am. 2000;27(1):25–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Carroll PR, Parsons JK. Prostate cancer early detection version 2.2016. 2016. Available from
  12. Catalona WJ, Beiser JA, Smith DS. Serum free prostate specific antigen and prostate specific antigen density measurements for predicting cancer in men with prior negative prostatic biopsies. J Urol. 1997;158(6):2162–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Catalona WJ, et al. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. JAMA. 1998;279(19):1542–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Catalona WJ, et al. A multicenter study of [-2]pro-prostate specific antigen combined with prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0 ng/ml prostate specific antigen range. J Urol. 2011;185(5):1650–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. De Santis M, et al. 2-18fluoro-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: an update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(6):1034–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferlay J, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(5):E359–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gouliamos AD. Imaging in clinical oncology. Milano: Springer; 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grover VPB, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging: principles and techniques: lessons for clinicians. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2015;5(3):246–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Hacking C, Frank Gaillard A, et al. Transitional-cell-carcinoma-bladder. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  20. Jones J. Testicular cancer. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  21. Kang SK, Kim D, Chandarana H. Contemporary imaging of the renal mass. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12(1):11–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim JH, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of small renal masses in real practice: sensitivity and specificity according to subjective radiologic interpretation. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):260.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Licklider S. Jewish penile carcinoma. J Urol. 1961;86:98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mark Thurston JJ. Bone scan. 2017 [16 October 2017]. Available from
  25. McNeal JE, et al. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol. 1988;12(12):897–906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mottet N. Prostate-cancer. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  27. Parkin DM. The global burden of urinary bladder cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 2008;42(218):12–20.Google Scholar
  28. Rauscher I, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer: how we review and report. Cancer Imaging. 2016;16:14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Rouprêt M. EAU guidelines on upper-urinary-tract-urothelial-cell-carcinoma. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  30. Sachdeva K. Testicular cancer. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  31. Smith D, Shetty A. Positron-emission-tomography. 2017 [cited 16 Oct 2017]. Available from
  32. Tan LGL, et al. Prospective validation of %p2PSA and the Prostate Health Index, in prostate cancer detection in initial prostate biopsies of Asian men, with total PSA 4–10 ng ml(−1). Asian J Androl. 2017;19(3):286–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Verma S, Rajesh A. A clinically relevant approach to imaging prostate cancer: review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(3 Suppl):S1–10; Quiz S11–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Weinreb JC, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging – reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol. 2016;69(1):16–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyNational University Hospital, National University Health System (NUHS)SingaporeSingapore

Section editors and affiliations

  • Maximilian Burger
    • 1
  • Axel Stuart Merseburger
    • 2
  1. 1.Klinik und Poliklinik für UrologieUniversität Regensburg/Caritas-Krankenhaus St. JosefRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital of Schleswig-HolsteinLuebeckGermany

Personalised recommendations