Search

Population‐based organised repeated screening for prostate cancer has been found to reduce disease‐specific mortality, but with substantial overdiagnosis leading to overtreatment. Although only very few countries have implemented a screening programme on a national level, individual prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) testing is common. This opportunistic testing may have little favourable impact, while stressing the side‐effects. The classic early detection protocols as were state‐of‐the‐art in the 1990s applied a PSA and digital rectal examination threshold for sextant systematic prostate biopsy, with a fixed interval for re‐testing, and limited indication for expectant management. In the three decades since these trials were started, different important improvements have become available in the cascade of screening, indication for biopsy, and treatment. The main developed aspects include: better identification of individuals at risk (using early/baseline PSA, family history, and/or genetic profile), individualised re‐testing interval, optimised and individualised starting and stopping age, with gradual invitation at a fixed age rather than invitation of a wider range of age groups, risk stratification for biopsy (using PSA density, risk calculator, magnetic resonance imaging, serum and urine biomarkers, or combinations/sequences), targeted biopsy, transperineal biopsy approach, active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer, and improved staging of disease. All these developments are suggested to decrease the side‐effects of screening, while at least maintaining the advantages, but Level 1 evidence is lacking. The knowledge gained and new developments on early detection are being tested in different prospective screening trials throughout Europe. In addition, the European Union‐funded PRostate cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union (PRAISE‐U) project will compare and evaluate different screening pilots throughout Europe. Implementation and sustainability will also be addressed. Modern screening approaches may reduce the burden of the second most frequent cause of cancer‐related death in European males, while minimising side‐effects. Also, less efficacious opportunistic early detection may be indirectly reduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Association of Urology, together with consortium partners, has launched PRAISE-U (Prostate Cancer Awareness and Initiative for Screening in the European Union), a project involving 25 institutions across 12 countries that is funded under the EU4Health program. The aim is to reduce the morbidity and mortality of prostate cancer in EU member states via customized and risk-based screening programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a desire to engineer mammalian host cell lines to improve cell growth/biomass accumulation and recombinant biopharmaceutical protein production in industrially relevant cell lines such as the CHOK1 and HEK293 cell lines. The over-expression of individual subunits of the eukaryotic translation factor eIF3 in mammalian cells has previously been shown to result in oncogenic properties being imparted on cells, including increased cell proliferation and growth and enhanced global protein synthesis rates. Here we report on the engineering of CHOK1 and HEK cells to over-express the eIF3i and eIF3c subunits of the eIF3 complex and the resultant impact on cell growth and a reporter of exogenous recombinant protein production. Transient over-expression of eIF3i in HEK293 and CHOK1 cells resulted in a modest increase in total eIF3i amounts (maximum 40% increase above control) and an approximate 10% increase in global protein synthesis rates in CHOK1 cells. Stable over-expression of eIF3i in CHOK1 cells was not achievable, most likely due to the already high levels of eIF3i in CHO cells compared to HEK293 cells, but was achieved in HEK293 cells. HEK293 cells engineered to over-express eIF3i had faster growth that was associated with increased c-Myc expression, achieved higher cell biomass and gave enhanced yields of a reporter of recombinant protein production. Whilst CHOK1 cells could not be engineered to over-express eIF3i directly, they could be engineered to over-express eIF3c, which resulted in a subsequent increase in eIF3i amounts and c-Myc expression. The CHOK1 eIF3c engineered cells grew to higher cell numbers and had enhanced cap- and IRES-dependent recombinant protein synthesis. Collectively these data show that engineering of subunits of the eIF3 complex can enhance cell growth and recombinant protein synthesis in mammalian cells in a cell specific manner that has implications for the engineering or selection of fast growing or high producing cells for production of recombinant proteins. • We have engineered the overexpression of eIF3i and eIF3c in CHOK1 and HEK293 cells. • HEK293 cells overexpressing eIF3i had faster growth and increased c-Myc expression. • Direct stable overexpression of eIF3i in CHOK1 cells was not achievable. • Overexpression of eIF3c in CHOK1 cells resulted in an increase in eIF3i. • eIF3c overexpressing CHOK1 cells had enhanced recombinant protein synthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recommendations against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in 2012 have increased advanced-stage diagnosis and prostate cancer–specific mortality rates. To present the position of the European Association of Urology (EAU) in 2021 and provide recommendations for the use of PSA testing as part of a risk-adapted strategy for the early detection of prostate cancer. The authors combined their review of relevant literature, including the EAU prostate cancer guidelines 2021 update, with their own knowledge to provide an expert opinion, representing the EAU's position in 2021. The EAU has developed a risk-adapted early prostate cancer detection strategy for well-informed men based on PSA testing, risk calculators, and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, which can differentiate significant from insignificant prostate cancer. This approach largely avoids the overdiagnosis/overtreatment of men unlikely to experience disease-related symptoms during their lifetime and facilitates an early diagnosis of men with significant cancer to receive active treatment. It also reduces advanced-stage diagnosis, thereby potentially reducing prostate cancer–specific mortality and improving quality of life. Education is required among urologists, general practitioners, radiologists, policy makers, and healthy men, including endorsement by the European Commission to adapt the European Council's screening recommendations in its 2022 plan and requests to individual countries for its incorporation into national cancer plans. This risk-adapted approach for the early detection of prostate cancer will reverse current unfavourable trends and ultimately save lives. The European Association of Urology has developed a patient information leaflet and algorithm for the early diagnosis of prostate cancer. It can identify men who do not need magnetic resonance imaging or a biopsy and those who would not show any symptoms versus those with more aggressive disease who require further tests/treatment. We need to raise awareness of this algorithm to ensure that all well-informed men at risk of significant prostate cancer are offered a prostate-specific antigen test. A risk-adapted early prostate cancer detection strategy, incorporating prostate-specific antigen testing, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, risk calculators, and biomarkers, will avoid overdiagnosis/overtreatment of insignificant cancers and ensure early detection and treatment of significant cancers, thereby improving quality of life and reducing prostate cancer–related deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: Individualized risk-adapted algorithms in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis using predictive prebiopsy variables in addition to prostate-specific antigen value may result in a considerable reduction of unnecessary systematic biopsies. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has emerged as a secondary prediction tool that can further improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). This review explores the performance of new MRI risk models for indicating a biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis. Results and considerations: The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for detecting csPCa varies between 0.64 and 0.91 in biopsy-naïve men, and between 0.78 and 0.93 in men with a previous negative biopsy. The utility of multivariate risk prediction tools including MRI suspicion scores as an extra input parameter has the potential to avoid a notable number of biopsies and detection of clinically insignificant PCa at a low price of missing some csPCa. The trade-off depends on the risk threshold that is chosen. In biopsy-naïve men a net benefit was obtained at a risk threshold of above 10% for csPCa in most MRI risk prediction models. All constructed MRI risk models used (referral) patient cohorts with high prevalence of csPCa. Using more representative cohorts from daily clinical screening, net benefit may attenuate at lower risk thresholds. Strengths and limitations of these models are discussed. Future directions: To assess their wider applicability, in-depth analysis of mpMRI predictive qualities should be further investigated, in combination with required external validation of these models in a multicenter setting with large prospective datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) has previously demonstrated that prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening decreases prostate cancer (PCa) mortality. To determine whether PSA screening decreases PCa mortality for up to 16 yr and to assess results following adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. This multicentre population-based randomised screening trial was conducted in eight European countries. Report includes 182 160 men, followed up until 2014 (maximum of 16 yr), with a predefined core age group of 162 389 men (55–69 yr), selected from population registry. The outcome was PCa mortality, also assessed with adjustment for nonparticipation and the number of screening rounds attended. The rate ratio of PCa mortality was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72–0.89, p < 0.001) at 16 yr. The difference in absolute PCa mortality increased from 0.14% at 13 yr to 0.18% at 16 yr. The number of men needed to be invited for screening to prevent one PCa death was 570 at 16 yr compared with 742 at 13 yr. The number needed to diagnose was reduced to 18 from 26 at 13 yr. Men with PCa detected during the first round had a higher prevalence of PSA >20 ng/ml (9.9% compared with 4.1% in the second round, p < 0.001) and higher PCa mortality (hazard ratio = 1.86, p < 0.001) than those detected subsequently. Findings corroborate earlier results that PSA screening significantly reduces PCa mortality, showing larger absolute benefit with longer follow-up and a reduction in excess incidence. Repeated screening may be important to reduce PCa mortality on a population level. In this report, we looked at the outcomes from prostate cancer in a large European population. We found that repeated screening reduces the risk of dying from prostate cancer. This European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer trial follow-up reports that repeated screening reduces the risk of dying from prostate cancer for up to 16 yr. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculators (ERSPC-RCs) help to avoid unnecessary transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsies (TRUS-Bx). Multivariable risk stratification could also avoid unnecessary biopsies following multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Objective To construct MRI-ERSPC-RCs for the prediction of any- and high-grade (Gleason score ≥3 + 4) prostate cancer (PCa) in 12-core TRUS-Bx ± MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) by adding Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and age as parameters to the ERSPC-RC3 (biopsy-naïve men) and ERSPC-RC4 (previously biopsied men). Design, setting, and participants A total of 961 men received mpMRI and 12-core TRUS-Bx ± MRI-TBx (in case of PI-RADS ≥3) in five institutions. Data of 504 biopsy-naïve and 457 previously biopsied men were used to adjust the ERSPC-RC3 and ERSPC-RC4. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Logistic regression models were constructed. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the original ERSPC-RCs and MRI-ERSPC-RCs (including PI-RADS and age) for any- and high-grade PCa were compared. Decision curve analysis was performed to assess the clinical utility of the MRI-ERSPC-RCs. Results and limitations MRI-ERSPC-RC3 had a significantly higher AUC for high-grade PCa compared with the ERSPC-RC3: 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81–0.88) versus 0.76 (95% CI 0.71–0.80, p < 0.01). Similarly, MRI-ERSPC-RC4 had a higher AUC for high-grade PCa compared with the ERSPC-RC4: 0.85 (95% CI 0.81–0.89) versus 0.74 (95% CI 0.69–0.79, p < 0.01). Unlike for the MRI-ERSPC-RC3, decision curve analysis showed clear net benefit of the MRI-ERSPC-RC4 at a high-grade PCa risk threshold of ≥5%. Using a ≥10% high-grade PCa risk threshold to biopsy for the MRI-ERSPC-RC4, 36% biopsies are saved, missing low- and high-grade PCa, respectively, in 15% and 4% of men who are not biopsied. Conclusions We adjusted the ERSPC-RCs for the prediction of any- and high-grade PCa in 12-core TRUS-Bx ± MRI-TBx. Although the ability of the MRI-ERSPC-RC3 for biopsy-naïve men to avoid biopsies remains questionable, application of the MRI-ERSPC-RC4 in previously biopsied men in our cohort would have avoided 36% of biopsies, missing high-grade PCa in 4% of men who would not have received a biopsy. Patient summary We have constructed magnetic resonance imaging-based Rotterdam European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (MRI-ERSPC) risk calculators for prostate cancer prediction in transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy by incorporating age and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score into the original ERSPC risk calculators. The MRI-ERSPC risk calculator for previously biopsied men could be used to avoid one-third of biopsies following MRI. Take Home Message The magnetic resonance imaging-based Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (MRI-ERSPC) risk calculators include age and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System as parameters, and predict (Gleason ≥3 + 4) prostate cancer in transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy and MRI-targeted biopsy. The MRI-ERSPC risk calculator could help avoid one-third of biopsies following MRI in previously biopsied men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the key cellular responses to stress is the attenuation of mRNA translation and protein synthesis via the phosphorylation of eIF2ɑ (eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2ɑ). This is mediated by four eIF2ɑ kinases and it has been suggested that each kinase is specific to the cellular stress imposed. In the present study, we show that both PERK (PKR-like endoplasmic reticulum kinase/eIF2ɑ kinase 3) and GCN2 (general control non-derepressible 2/eIF2ɑ kinase 4) are required for the stress responses associated with conditions encountered by cells overexpressing secreted recombinant protein. Importantly, whereas GCN2 is the kinase that is activated following cold-shock/hypothermic culturing of mammalian cells, PERK and GCN2 have overlapping functions since knockdown of one of these at the mRNA level is compensated for by the cell by up-regulating levels of the other. The protein p58IPK {also known as DnaJ3C [DnaJ heat-shock protein (hsp) 40 homologue, subfamily C, member 3]} is known to inhibit the eIF2ɑ kinases PKR (dsRNA-dependent protein kinase/eIF2ɑ kinase 2) and PERK and hence prevent or delay eIF2ɑ phosphorylation and consequent inhibition of translation. However, we show that p58IPK is a general inhibitor of the eIF2ɑ kinases in that it also interacts with GCN2. Thus forced overexpression of cytoplasmic p58 delays eIF2ɑ phosphorylation, suppresses GCN2 phosphorylation and prolongs protein synthesis under endoplasmic reticulum (ER), hypothermic and prolonged culture stress conditions. Taken together, our data suggest that there is considerable cross talk between the eIF2ɑ kinases to ensure that protein synthesis is tightly regulated. Their activation is controlled by p58 and the expression levels and localization of this protein are crucial in the capacity the cells to respond to cellular stress via control of protein synthesis rates and subsequent folding in the ER. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

eIF3 (eukaryotic initiation factor 3) is the largest and most complex eukaryotic mRNA translation factor in terms of the number of protein components or subunits. In mammals, eIF3 is composed of 13 different polypeptide subunits, of which five, i.e. a, b, c, g and i, are conserved and essential in vivo from yeasts to mammals. In the present study, we show that the eukaryotic cytosolic chaperonin CCT [chaperonin containing TCP-1 (tailless complex polypeptide 1)] binds to newly synthesized eIF3b and promotes the correct folding of eIF3h and eIF3i. Interestingly, overexpression of these last two subunits is associated with enhanced translation of specific mRNAs over and above the general enhancement of global translation. In agreement with this, our data show that, as CCT is required for the correct folding of eIF3h and eIF3i subunits, it indirectly influences gene expression with eIF3i overexpression enhancing both cap- and IRES (internal ribosome entry segment)-dependent translation initiation, whereas eIF3h overexpression selectively increases IRES-dependent translation initiation. Importantly, these studies demonstrate the requirement of the chaperonin machinery for the correct folding of essential components of the translational machinery and provide further evidence of the close interplay between the cell environment, cell signalling, cell proliferation, the chaperone machinery and translational apparatus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To assess the value of risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prostate-specific antigen density (PSA-D) in reducing unnecessary biopsies without missing Gleason pattern 4 prostate cancer in men on active surveillance (AS). Patients and Methods In all, 210 men on AS with Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer received a first MRI and if indicated [Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥3] targeted biopsy (TBx) using MRI-transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion. The MRI was performed 3 months after diagnosis (group A: n = 97), at confirmatory biopsy (group B: n = 39) or at surveillance biopsy after one or more repeat TRUS-guided systematic biopsies (TRUS-Bx) (group C: n = 74). The primary outcome was upgrading to Gleason score ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer based on MRI ± TBx in groups A, B and C. Biopsy outcomes were stratified for the overall PI-RADS score and PSA-D to identify a subgroup of men in whom a biopsy could have been avoided as no Gleason score upgrading was detected. Results In all, 134/210 (64%) men had a positive MRI and 51/210 (24%) men had Gleason score upgrading based on MRI±TBx. The percentage of Gleason score upgrading based on MRI-TBx was 23% (22/97), 23% (9/39) and 27% (20/74) in respectively groups A, B and C. Additional Gleason score upgrading detected by TRUS-Bx occurred in 8% (3/39) of men in group B and 6% (1/17) of men who received TRUS-Bx in group C. No Gleason score upgrading was detected by MRI-TBx in men with a PI-RADS score of 3 and a PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2(n = 15), nor by TRUS-Bx in men with a PI-RADS score of 1–3 and a PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2 (n = 15). Conclusion At least one out of five men on AS with Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer at diagnostic TRUS-Bx show Gleason score upgrading based on first MRI ± TBx at baseline, confirmatory or surveillance biopsy. Men with a PIRADS score of 1–3 and PSA-D of <0.15 ng/mL2 did not show Gleason score upgrading at MRI ± TBx or TRUS-Bx at each time point of surveillance. Thus risk-stratification based on PI-RADS and PSA-D may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on AS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The survival rate for men with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 2 prostate cancer (PCa) without invasive cribriform (CR) and intraductal carcinoma (IDC) is similar to that for ISUP grade 1. If updated into the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC Rotterdam) risk calculator number 3 (RC3), this may further improve upfront selection of men who need a biopsy. Objective To improve the number of possible biopsies avoided, while limiting undiagnosed clinically important PCa by applying the updated RC3 for risk-based patient selection. Design, setting, and participants The RC3 is based on the first screening round of the ERSPC Rotterdam, which involved 3616 men. In 2015, histopathologic slides for PCa cases ( n = 885) were re-evaluated. Low-risk (LR) PCa was defined as ISUP grade 1 or 2 without CR/IDC. High-risk (HR) PCa was defined as ISUP grade 2 with CR/IDC and PCa with ISUP grade≥3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis We updated the RC3 using multinomial logistic regression analysis, including data on age, PSA, digital rectal examination, and prostate volume, for predicting LR and HR PCa. Predictive accuracy was quantified using receiver operating characteristic analysis and decision curve analysis. Results and limitations Men without PCa could effectively be distinguished from men with LR PCa and HR PCa (area under the curve 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68–0.72 and 0.92, 95% CI 0.90–0.94). At a 1% risk threshold, the updated calculator would lead to a 34% reduction in unnecessary biopsies, while only 2% of HR PCa cases would be undiagnosed. Conclusions A relatively simple risk stratification tool augmented with a highly sensitive contemporary pathologic biopsy classification would result in a considerable decrease in unnecessary prostate biopsies and overdiagnosis of potentially indolent disease. Patient summary We improved a well-known prostate risk calculator with a new pathology classification system that better reflects disease burden. This new risk calculator allows individualized prediction of the chance of having (potentially aggressive) biopsy-detectable prostate cancer and can guide shared decision-making when considering prostate biopsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objectives: Currently, several prostate cancer rescreening intervals are in use in different countries worldwide, varying from 1 to 4 years. Recently, it has been proposed to determine the rescreening interval relative to the initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level and possibly to extend the rescreening interval up to 5 years. Methods: We evaluated the screening results of two subsequent screening visits (4-year interval) of 1703 men aged 55 to 65 years with an initial PSA level of 1.0 ng/mL or less within a randomized screening trial. We assessed the PSA values, numbers of men biopsied (biopsy indication: PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or greater), and numbers of cancers detected at the second and third screening visits. Results: A total of 1327 men (79.3%) attended the second screening visit. Of these men, 13 (0.98%) had a PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or greater, and three cancers were detected (cancer detection rate 0.23%). At the third screening visit, 1017 men (76.8%) attended, 34 men (3.3%) had a PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or greater, and five cancers were detected (cancer detection rate 0.49%). The 2344 subsequent PSA determinations in an 8-year period after the initial screening resulted in eight cancers detected, for an overall cancer detection rate of 0.47%. Through linkage of all men with the cancer registry, no additional cancers were found. Conclusions: A strategy of PSA screening every 8 years for men with a PSA level of 1.0 ng/mL or less will lead to a considerable decrease in the number of screening visits (with the associated costs and stress), with a minimal risk of missing aggressive cancer at a curable stage. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To study whether probabilistic selection by the use of a nomogram could improve patient selection for active surveillance (AS) compared to the various sets of rule-based AS inclusion criteria currently used. Methods: We studied Dutch and Swedish patients participating in the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). We explored which men who were initially diagnosed with cT1-2, Gleason 6 (Gleason pattern ≤3 + 3) had histopathological indolent PCa at RP [defined as pT2, Gleason pattern ≤3 and tumour volume (TV) ≤0.5 or TV ≤ 1.3 ml, and TV no part of criteria (NoTV)]. Rule-based selection was according to the Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS), Klotz, and Johns Hopkins criteria. An existing nomogram to define probability-based selection for AS was refitted for the TV1.3 and NoTV indolent PCa definitions. Results: 619 of 864 men undergoing RP had cT1-2, Gleason 6 disease at diagnosis and were analysed. Median follow-up was 8.9 years. 229 (37 %), 356 (58 %), and 410 (66 %) fulfilled the TV0.5, TV1.3, and NoTV indolent PCa criteria at RP. Discriminating between indolent and significant disease according to area under the curve (AUC) was: TV0.5: 0.658 (PRIAS), 0.523 (Klotz), 0.642 (Hopkins), 0.685 (nomogram). TV1.3: 0.630 (PRIAS), 0.550 (Klotz), 0.615 (Hopkins), 0.646 (nomogram). NoTV: 0.603 (PRIAS), 0.530 (Klotz), 0.589 (Hopkins), 0.608 (nomogram). Conclusions: The performance of a nomogram, the Johns Hopkins, and PRIAS rule-based criteria are comparable. Because the nomogram allows individual trade-offs, it could be a good alternative to rigid rule-based criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate may improve the diagnostic accuracy of prostate cancer detection in MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) in comparison to transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx). Objective Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence regarding the diagnostic benefits of MRI-TBx versus TRUS-Bx in detection of overall prostate cancer (primary objective) and significant/insignificant prostate cancer (secondary objective). Evidence acquisition A systematic review of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Cinahl, and the Cochrane library was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Identified reports were critically appraised according to the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. Only men with a positive MRI were included. Evidence synthesis The reports we included (16 studies) used both MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx for prostate cancer detection. A cumulative total of 1926 men with positive MRI were included, with prostate cancer prevalence of 59%. MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx did not significantly differ in overall prostate cancer detection (sensitivity 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80–0.89, and 0.81, 95% CI 0.70–0.88, respectively). MRI-TBx had a higher rate of detection of significant prostate cancer compared to TRUS-Bx (sensitivity 0.91, 95% CI 0.87–0.94 vs 0.76, 95% CI 0.64–0.84) and a lower rate of detection of insignificant prostate cancer (sensitivity 0.44, 95% CI 0.26–0.64 vs 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.77–0.87). Subgroup analysis revealed an improvement in significant prostate cancer detection by MRI-TBx in men with previous negative biopsy, rather than in men with initial biopsy (relative sensitivity 1.54, 95% CI 1.05–2.57 vs 1.10, 95% CI 1.00–1.22). Because of underlying methodological flaws of MRI-TBx, the comparison of MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx needs to be regarded with caution. Conclusions In men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer and a subsequent positive MRI, MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx did not differ in overall prostate cancer detection. However, MRI-TBx had a higher rate of detection of significant prostate cancer and a lower rate of detection of insignificant prostate cancer compared with TRUS-Bx. Patient summary We reviewed recent advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for guidance and targeting of prostate biopsy for prostate cancer detection. We found evidence to suggest that MRI-guided targeted biopsy benefits the diagnosis of prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BINoculars is a tool for data reduction and analysis of large sets of surface diffraction data that have been acquired with a two-dimensional X-ray detector. The intensity of each pixel of a two-dimensional detector is projected onto a three-dimensional grid in reciprocal-lattice coordinates using a binning algorithm. This allows for fast acquisition and processing of high-resolution data sets and results in a significant reduction of the size of the data set. The subsequent analysis then proceeds in reciprocal space. It has evolved from the specific needs of the ID03 beamline at the ESRF, but it has a modular design and can be easily adjusted and extended to work with data from other beamlines or from other measurement techniques. This paper covers the design and the underlying methods employed in this software package and explains how BINoculars can be used to improve the workflow of surface X-ray diffraction measurements and analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) has been integrated in a miniature high-pressure flow reactor for in-situ observations of heterogeneous catalytic reactions under conditions similar to those of industrial processes. The AFM can image model catalysts such as those consisting of metal nanoparticles on flat oxide supports in a gas atmosphere up to 6 bar and at a temperature up to 600 K, while the catalytic activity can be measured using mass spectrometry. The high-pressure reactor is placed inside an Ultrahigh Vacuum (UHV) system to supplement it with standard UHV sample preparation and characterization techniques. To demonstrate that this instrument successfully bridges both the pressure gap and the materials gap, images have been recorded of supported palladium nanoparticles catalyzing the oxidation of carbon monoxide under high-pressure, high-temperature conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scavenger receptors on the cell surface of macrophages play an important role in host defence through their ability to bind microbial ligands and induce phagocytosis. Concurrently, signal transduction pathways are initiated that aid in defence mechanisms against the invading microbe. Here we report on the function of scavenger receptor Marco ( Ma crophage r eceptor with co llagenous structure) during infection of zebrafish embryos with Mycobacterium marinum, a close relative of M. tuberculosis. Morpholino knockdown demonstrates that Marco is required for the rapid phagocytosis of M. marinum following intravenous infection. Furthermore, gene expression analysis shows that Marco controls the initial transient pro-inflammatory response to M. marinum and remains a determining factor for the immune response signature at later stages of infection. Increased bacterial burden following marco knockdown indicates that this scavenger receptor is important for control of M. marinum growth, likely due to delayed phagocytosis and reduced pro-inflammatory signalling observed under conditions of Marco deficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Evidence from randomized trials on the effects of screening for prostate cancer (PCa) on disease-specific mortality accumulates slowly with increasing follow-up. Objective: To assess data on PCa-specific mortality in the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial. Design, setting, and participants: A randomized controlled trial with randomization after signed, written informed consent (efficacy trial). In the period 1993–1999, a total of 42 376 men aged 54–74 yr were randomized to a screening arm (S-arm) (n = 21 210 with screening every 4 yr, applying a total prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level cut-off ≥3.0 ng/ml as biopsy indication) or a control arm (C-arm) (n = 21 166; no intervention). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Number of PCas detected per arm depicted by predefined time periods and prognostic groups. PCa-specific mortality analyses using Poisson regression in age group 55–74 yr at randomization and separately in the predefined age group of 55–69 yr. Results and limitations: After a median follow-up of 12.8 yr, 19 765 men (94.2%) were screened at least once and 2674 PCas were detected (of which 561 [21.0%] were interval PCas). In the C-arm, 1430 PCas were detected, resulting in an excess incidence of 59 PCas per 1000 men randomized (61 PCas per 1000 in age group 55–69 yr). Thirty-two percent of all men randomized have died. PCa-specific mortality relative-risk (RR) reductions of 20.0% overall (age: 55–74 yr; p = 0.042) and 31.6% (age: 55–69 yr; p = 0.004) were found. A 14.1% increase was found in men aged 70–74 yr (not statistically significant). Absolute PCa mortality was 1.8 per 1000 men randomized (2.6 per 1000 men randomized in age group 55–69 yr). The number needed to invite and number needed to manage were 565 and 33, respectively, for age group 55–74 yr, and 392 and 24, respectively, for age group 65–69 yr. Given the slow natural history of the disease, follow-up might be too short. Conclusions: Systematic PSA-based screening reduced PCa-specific mortality by 32% in the age range of 55–69 yr. The roughly twofold higher incidence in the S-arm underlines the importance of tools to better identify those men who would benefit from screening. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Inconclusive test results often occur after prostate-specific antigen (PSA)–based screening for prostate cancer (PCa), leading to uncertainty on whether, how, and when to repeat testing. Objective: To develop and validate a prediction tool for the risk of PCa 4 yr after an initially negative screen. Design, setting, and participants: We analyzed data from 15 791 screen-negative men aged 55–70 yr at the initial screening round of the Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Follow-up and repeat screening at 4 yr showed either no PCa, low-risk PCa, or potentially high-risk PCa (defined as clinical stage >T2b and/or biopsy Gleason score ≥7 and/or PSA ≥10.0 ng/ml). A multinomial logistic regression analysis included initial screening data on age, PSA, digital rectal examination (DRE), family history, prostate volume, and having had a previous negative biopsy. The 4-yr risk predictions were validated with additional follow-up data up to 8 yr after initial screening. Results and limitations: Positive family history and, especially, PSA level predicted PCa, whereas a previous negative biopsy or a large prostate volume reduced the likelihood of future PCa. The risk of having PCa 4 yr after an initially negative screen was 3.6% (interquartile range: 1.0–4.7%). Additional 8-yr follow-up data confirmed these predictions. Although data were based on sextant biopsies and a strict protocol-based biopsy indication, we suggest that men with a low predicted 4-yr risk (eg, ≤1.0%) could be rescreened at longer intervals or not at all, depending on competing risks, while men with an elevated 4-yr risk (eg, ≥5%) might benefit from immediate retesting. These findings need to be validated externally. Conclusions: This 4-yr future risk calculator, based on age, PSA, DRE, family history, prostate volume, and previous biopsy status, may be a promising tool for reducing uncertainty, unnecessary testing, and overdiagnosis of PCa. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article discusses the draft guidelines issued for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in men. It mentions the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer which included 162,243 men under ages between 55-69 years for the study and highlights the conclusion on reduction at mortality rate among the cancer patients. It mentions the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force which conducted a literature review on draft guidelines for the cancer screening.

Abstract: The early detection of asymptomatic prostate cancer has led to the increased incidence of tumours that are unlikely to become symptomatic during life, so called indolent cancers. The prediction of low risk and indolent prostate cancer is needed to avoid overtreatment by unnecessary invasive therapies, and select men for active surveillance. Some of the currently available nomograms predicting these low risk tumours have been validated in independent populations. However, assessment to the compliance with their treatment advises based on the calculation of probability are scarce. The ultimate value of nomograms for the urologic practice can only be assessed by analysing their practical implementation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Study Type - Prognosis (cohort series) Level of Evidence 2a What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The present study is one of the first to investigate urologists' and patients' compliance with recommendations based on a risk calculator that calculates the probability of indolent prostate cancer. A threshold was set for a recommendation of active surveillance vs active treatment. Active surveillance recommendations based on a prostate cancer risk calculator were followed by most patients, but 30% with active treatment recommendations chose active surveillance instead. This indicates that the threshold may be too high for urologists and patients. OBJECTIVES To assess urologists' and patients' compliance with treatment recommendations based on a prostate cancer risk calculator (RC) and the reasons for non-compliance., To assess the difference between patients who were compliant and non-compliant with recommendations based on this RC., PATIENTS AND METHODS Eight urologists from five Dutch hospitals included 240 patients with prostate cancer (PCa), aged 55-75 years, from December 2008 to February 2011., The urologists used the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer RC which predicts the probability of potentially indolent PCa (P[indolent]), using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume and pathological findings on biopsy., Inclusion criteria were PSA <20 ng/mL, clinical stage T1 or T2a-c disease, <50% positive sextant biopsy cores, ≤20 mm cancer tissue, ≥40 mm benign tissue and Gleason ≤3 + 3. If the P(indolent) was >70%, active surveillance (AS) was recommended, and active treatment (AT) otherwise., After the treatment decision, patients completed a questionnaire about their treatment choice, related (dis)advantages, and validated measurements of other factors, e.g. anxiety., RESULTS Most patients (45/55, 82%) were compliant with an AS recommendation. Another 54 chose AS despite an AT recommendation (54/185, 29%)., The most common reason for non-compliance with AT recommendations by urologists was the patient's preference for AS ( n= 30). These patients most often reported the delay of physical side effects of AT as the main advantage ( n= 19)., Those who complied with AT recommendations had higher mean PSA levels (8 vs 7 ng/mL, P= 0.02), higher mean amount of cancer tissue (7 vs 3 mm, P < 0.001), lower mean P(indolent) (36% vs 55%, P < 0.001), and higher mean generic anxiety scores (42 vs 38, P= 0.03) than those who did not comply., CONCLUSIONS AS recommendations were followed by most patients, while 29% with AT recommendations chose AS instead., Although further research is needed to validate the RC threshold, the current version is already useful in treatment decision-making in men with localized PCa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Type - Diagnostic (cohort) Level of Evidence 2b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? So far, few publications have shown that a prediction model influences the behaviour of both physicians and patients. To our knowledge, it was unknown whether urologists and patients are compliant with the recommendations of a prostate cancer risk calculator and their reasons for non-compliance. Recommendations of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator (ERSPC RC) about the need of a prostate biopsy were followed in most patients. In most cases of non-compliance with 'no biopsy' recommendations, a PSA level ≥3 ng/mL was decisive to opt for biopsy. Before implementation of the ERSPC RC in urological practices at a large scale, it is important to obtain insight into the use of guidelines that might counteract the adoption of the use of the RC as a result of opposing recommendations. OBJECTIVES To assess both urologist and patient compliance with a 'no biopsy' or 'biopsy' recommendation of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Risk Calculator (RC), as well as their reasons for non-compliance., To assess determinants of patient compliance., PATIENTS AND METHODS The ERSPC RC calculates the probability on a positive sextant prostate biopsy ( Pposb) using serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, outcomes of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography, and ultrasonographically assessed prostate volume. A biopsy was recommended if Pposb≥20%., Between 2008 and 2011, eight urologists from five Dutch hospitals included 443 patients (aged 55-75 years) after a PSA test with no previous biopsy., Urologists calculated the Pposb using the RC in the presence of patients and completed a questionnaire about compliance., Patients completed a questionnaire about prostate cancer knowledge, attitude towards prostate biopsy, self-rated health (12-Item Short Form Health Survey), anxiety (State Trait Anxiety Inventory-6, Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer) and decision-making measures (Decisional Conflict Scale)., RESULTS Both urologists and patients complied with the RC recommendation in 368 of 443 (83%) cases., If a biopsy was recommended, almost all patients (96%; 257/269) complied, although 63 of the 174 (36%) patients were biopsied against the recommendation of the RC., Compliers with a 'no biopsy' recommendation had a lower mean Pposb than non-compliers (9% vs 14%; P < 0.001)., Urologists opted for biopsies against the recommendations of the RC because of an elevated PSA level (≥3 ng/mL) (78%; 49/63) and patients because they wanted certainty (60%; 38/63)., CONCLUSIONS Recommendations of the ERSPC RC on prostate biopsy were followed in most patients., The RC hence may be a promising tool for supporting clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare the predictive performance and potential clinical usefulness of risk calculators of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC RC) with and without information on prostate volume. Methods: We studied 6 cohorts (5 European and 1 US) with a total of 15,300 men, all biopsied and with pre-biopsy TRUS measurements of prostate volume. Volume was categorized into 3 categories (25, 40, and 60 cc), to reflect use of digital rectal examination (DRE) for volume assessment. Risks of prostate cancer were calculated according to a ERSPC DRE-based RC (including PSA, DRE, prior biopsy, and prostate volume) and a PSA + DRE model (including PSA, DRE, and prior biopsy). Missing data on prostate volume were completed by single imputation. Risk predictions were evaluated with respect to calibration (graphically), discrimination (AUC curve), and clinical usefulness (net benefit, graphically assessed in decision curves). Results: The AUCs of the ERSPC DRE-based RC ranged from 0.61 to 0.77 and were substantially larger than the AUCs of a model based on only PSA + DRE (ranging from 0.56 to 0.72) in each of the 6 cohorts. The ERSPC DRE-based RC provided net benefit over performing a prostate biopsy on the basis of PSA and DRE outcome in five of the six cohorts. Conclusions: Identifying men at increased risk for having a biopsy detectable prostate cancer should consider multiple factors, including an estimate of prostate volume. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculators (RCs) are validated tools for prostate cancer (PCa) risk assessment and include prostate volume (PV) data from transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). Objective: Develop and validate an RC based on digital rectal examination (DRE) that circumvents the need for TRUS but still includes information on PV. Design, setting, and participants: For development of the DRE-based RC, we studied the original ERSPC Rotterdam RC population including 3624 men (885 PCa cases) and 2896 men (547 PCa cases) detected at first and repeat screening 4 yr later, respectively. A validation cohort consisted of 322 men, screened in 2010–2011 as participants in ERSPC Rotterdam. Measurements: Data on TRUS-assessed PV in the development cohorts were re-coded into three categories (25, 40, and 60cm3) to assess the loss of information by categorization of volume information. New RCs including PSA, DRE, and PV categories (DRE-based RC) were developed for men with and without a previous negative biopsy to predict overall and clinically significant PCa (high-grade [HG] PCa) defined as T stage >T2b and/or Gleason score ≥7. Predictive accuracy was quantified by the area under the receiver operating curve. We compared performance with the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) RC in the validation study. Results and limitations: Areas under the curve (AUC) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) alone, PSA and DRE, the DRE-based RC, and the original ERSPC RC to predict PCa at initial biopsy were 0.69, 0.73, 0.77, and 0.79, respectively. The corresponding AUCs for predicting HG PCa were higher (0.74, 0.82, 0.85, and 0.86). Similar results were seen in men previously biopsied and in the validation cohort. The DRE-based RC outperformed the PCPT RC (AUC 0.69 vs 0.59; p =0.0001) and a model based on PSA and DRE only (AUC 0.69 vs 0.63; p =0.0075) in the relatively small validation cohort. Further validation is required. Conclusions: An RC should contain volume estimates based either on TRUS or DRE. Replacing TRUS measurements by DRE estimates may enhance implementation in the daily practice of urologists and general practitioners. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A sophisticated reading of the randomized trial evidence suggests that, although screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) can reduce cancer-specific mortality, it does so at considerable cost in terms of the number of men who need to be screened, biopsied, and treated to prevent one death. The challenge is to design screening programs that maximize benefits (reducing prostate cancer mortality) and minimize costs (overtreatment). Recent research has suggested that this can be achieved by risk-stratifying screening and biopsy; increasing reliance on active surveillance for low-risk cancer; restricting radical prostatectomy to high-volume surgeons; and using appropriately high-dose radiotherapy. In current U.S. practice, however, many men who are screened are unlikely to benefit, most men found to have low-risk cancers are referred for unnecessary curative treatment, and much treatment is given at low-volume centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The rate of decrease in advanced cancers is an estimate for determining prostate cancer (PCa) screening program effectiveness. Objective: Assess the effectiveness of PCa screening programs using a 2- or 4-yr screening interval. Design, setting, and participants: Men aged 55–64 yr were participants at two centers of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer: Gothenburg, Sweden (2-yr screening interval, n =4202), and Rotterdam, the Netherlands (4-yr screening interval, n =13 301). We followed participants until the date of PCa, the date of death, or the last follow-up at December 31, 2008, or up to a maximum of 12 yr after initial screening. Potentially life-threatening (advanced) cancer was defined as cancer with at least one of following characteristics: clinical stage ≥T3a, M1, or N1; serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20.0 ng/ml; or Gleason score ≥8 at biopsy. Intervention: We compared the proportional total (advanced) cancer incidence (screen-detected and interval cases), defined as the ratio of the observed number of (advanced) cancers to the expected numbers of (advanced) cancers based on the control arm of the study. Measurements: The proportional cancer incidence from the second screening round until the end of observation was compared using a 2- or 4-yr screening interval. Results and limitations: From screening round 2 until the end of observation, the proportional cancer incidence was 3.64 in Gothenburg and 3.08 in Rotterdam (relative risk [RR]: 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.33; p =0.009). The proportional advanced cancer incidence was 0.40 in Gothenburg and 0.69 in Rotterdam (RR: 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33–0.99; p =0.048); the RR for detection of low-risk PCa was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.25–1.71; p <0.001). This study was limited by the assumption that PSA testing in the control arm was similar in both centers. Conclusions: A 2-yr screening interval significantly reduced the incidence of advanced PCa; however, the 2-yr interval increased the overall risk of being diagnosed with (low-risk) PCa compared with a 4-yr interval in men aged 55–64 yr. Individualized screening algorithms must be improved to provide the strategy for this issue. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Study Type - Prognosis (inception cohort) Level of Evidence 1b OBJECTIVE • To compare the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Risk Calculator (PCPT-RC) and European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator (ERSPC-RC) in a single-institution Canadian cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS • At Princess Margaret Hospital, 982 consecutive patients with PCPT-RC and ERSPC-RC covariables were prospectively catalogued before prostate biopsy for suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). • Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated for each calculator and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). • Comparisons by area under the curve (AUC) and calibration plots were performed. • Predictors of PCa were identified by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS • PCa was detected in 46% and high-grade (HG) PCa (Gleason ≥4) in 23% of subjects with a median PSA level of 6.02 ng/mL. • Multivariable analysis identified transrectal ultrasonography nodule, prostate volume and PSA as the most important predictors of PCa and HG PCa. • ROC curve analysis showed that the ERSPC-RC (AUC = 0.71) outperformed the PCPT-RC (AUC = 0.63) and PSA (AUC = 0.55), for PCa prediction, P < 0.001. • The PCPT-RC was better calibrated in the higher prediction range (40-100%) than the ERSPC-RC, whereas the ERSPC-RC had better calibration and avoided more biopsies in the lower risk range (0-30%). • Discrimination of the ERSPC-RC continued to be superior to the PCPT-RC when the cohort was stratified by different clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS • The ERSPC-RC had better discrimination for predicting PCa compared to the PCPT-RC in this Canadian cohort. • Calibration would need to be improved to allow routine use of the ERSPC-RC in Canadian practice. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator (ERSPC-RC) has been validated in a European population and shown to outperform the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator (PCPT-RC) for predicting prostate cancer. However, the ERSPC-RC has not been validated in North America where the PCPT-RC has been extensively validated. This study is the first to compare these calculators in non-European patient cohort showing better performance of the ERSPC-RC, but poor calibration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The democratization of civil society and the development of modern medicine changed the sacrosanct doctor-patient relationship to a doctor-partner dialogue. Values and respect were lost in the process where common courtesy and empathy in trust were replaced by patient rights. Launch of Europa Uomo. Europa Uomo, the European prostate cancer coalition, represents 22 national, autonomous patient support groups. Its aim includes increasing the awareness of prostate diseases, support individualized treatment as a balance between optimal medical treatment and personalized care delivered by a multiprofessional team. We expect our information/education from dedicated professional societies while in return we share care for properly informed members as well as a fast, unbiased and cheap distribution of information/innovation across the European continent. The role of a patient group. Our advocacy role is focused on quality of life, tailored treatment, knowledge of risk factors, support for research and last but not least active partnerships. We believe that we can play a modest but basic role in common actions to overcome inequalities in treatment and care in Europe. Our responsibilities range from defining patient obligations to facilitating translational research and saving scarce health resources. The horizon of the patient. Our hope is to plead for a treatment policy on the man first and then on his cancer and to improve treatment outcomes by multiprofessional collaboration and the development of expert Prostate Units. Future expectations. A transparent, open communication line between the multiprofessional team and the patient is mandatory. The existing uncertainties should be discussed with common sense but always leave a factor of hope in survival or quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The serum PSA test still is the most important biomarker for the detection and follow-up of prostate cancer. PSA-based screening can reduce disease specific mortality but coinciding unnecessary testing and overdiagnosis warrant further research for more specific biomarkers. Numerous studies of both serum and urine-based prostate cancer biomarker candidates have been presented the last ten years. However, biomarkers for identifying the most aggressive subsets of this malignancy are still missing. Being non-invasive, urine-based tests might be suitable for both clinical and (mass) screening purposes, but also for prediction and to gain prognostic information. Protein-based, DNA-based and RNA-based urine biomarkers have been developed and tested. Protein markers in urine. Data on protein-based urine biomarkers (i.e. Annexin A3, matrix metalloproteinases and the urinary: serum PSA ratio) show up to now contradictory results and further studies are warranted to be able to assess their clinical value in which the cost aspect should not be overlooked. DNA markers in urine. Studies on DNA-based urine biomarkers focus on hypermethylation of gene panels with GSTP1 hypermethylation being the most promising individual marker. Larger prospective clinical studies of single markers and gene panels are however needed to validate their clinical utility. RNA markers in urine. RNA-based urine biomarkers are by far the most developed. The PCA3 test, the TMPRSS2 -- ERG fusion gene, transcript expression levels of GOLPH2, SPINK1 and their combination have been subject of many studies showing encouraging results. Conclusion. Up to now urine-based biomarkers represent a promising alternative or addition to serum-based biomarkers. Prospective studies in a multivariate setting, including larger sample sizes and avoiding attribution bias caused by preselection on the basis of serum PSA are however required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historical overview of monarchies in Europe – Conceptual development of ‘monarchy’ and ‘republic’ – Decline of the hereditary principle for heads of state in Europe – Rise of the constitutional monarchy – Pressure of the European Union on monarchy [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The serum PSA test still is the most important biomarker for the detection and follow-up of prostate cancer. PSA-based screening can reduce disease specific mortality but coinciding unnecessary testing and overdiagnosis warrant further research for more specific biomarkers. Numerous studies of both serum and urine-based prostate cancer biomarker candidates have been presented the last ten years. However, biomarkers for identifying the most aggressive subsets of this malignancy are still missing. Being non-invasive, urine-based tests might be suitable for both clinical and (mass) screening purposes, but also for prediction and to gain prognostic information. Protein-based, DNA-based and RNA-based urine biomarkers have been developed and tested. Protein markers in urine. Data on protein-based urine biomarkers (i.e. Annexin A3, matrix metalloproteinases and the urinary:serum PSA ratio) show up to now contradictory results and further studies are warranted to be able to assess their clinical value in which the cost aspect should not be overlooked. DNA markers in urine. Studies on DNA-based urine biomarkers focus on hypermethylation of gene panels with GSTP1 hypermethylation being the most promising individual marker. Larger prospective clinical studies of single markers and gene panels are however needed to validate their clinical utility. RNA markers in urine. RNA-based urine biomarkers are by far the most developed. The PCA3 test, the TMPRSS2--ERG fusion gene, transcript expression levels of GOLPH2, SPINK1 and their combination have been subject of many studies showing encouraging results. Conclusion. Up to now urine-based biomarkers represent a promising alternative or addition to serum-based biomarkers. Prospective studies in a multivariate setting, including larger sample sizes and avoiding attribution bias caused by preselection on the basis of serum PSA are however required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The democratization of civil society and the development of modern medicine changed the sacrosanct doctor-patient relationship to a doctor-partner dialogue. Values and respect were lost in the process where common courtesy and empathy in trust were replaced by patient rights. Launch of Europa Uomo. Europa Uomo, the European prostate cancer coalition, represents 22 national, autonomous patient support groups. Its aim includes increasing the awareness of prostate diseases, support individualized treatment as a balance between optimal medical treatment and personalized care delivered by a multiprofessional team. We expect our information/education from dedicated professional societies while in return we share care for properly informed members as well as a fast, unbiased and cheap distribution of information/innovation across the European continent. The role of a patient group. Our advocacy role is focused on quality of life, tailored treatment, knowledge of risk factors, support for research and last but not least active partnerships. We believe that we can play a modest but basic role in common actions to overcome inequalities in treatment and care in Europe. Our responsibilities range from defining patient obligations to facilitating translational research and saving scarce health resources. The horizon of the patient. Our hope is to plead for a treatment policy on the man first and then on his cancer and to improve treatment outcomes by multiprofessional collaboration and the development of expert Prostate Units. Future expectations. A transparent, open communication line between the multiprofessional team and the patient is mandatory. The existing uncertainties should be discussed with common sense but always leave a factor of hope in survival or quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Prediction models need external validation to assess their value beyond the setting where the model was derived from. Objective: To assess the external validity of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator (www.prostatecancer-riskcalculator.com) for the probability of having a positive prostate biopsy (P(posb)). Design, setting and participants: The ERSPC risk calculator was based on data of the initial screening round of the ERSPC section Rotterdam and validated in 1825 and 531 men biopsied at the initial screening round in the Finnish and Swedish sections of the ERSPC respectively. P(posb) was calculated using serum prostate specific antigen (PSA), outcome of digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasound and ultrasound assessed prostate volume. Measurements: The external validity was assessed for the presence of cancer at biopsy by calibration (agreement between observed and predicted outcomes), discrimination (separation of those with and without cancer), and decision curves (for clinical usefulness). Results and limitations: Prostate cancer was detected in 469 men (26%) of the Finnish cohort and in 124 men (23%) of the Swedish cohort. Systematic miscalibration was present in both cohorts (mean predicted probability 34% versus 26% observed, and 29% versus 23% observed, both p <0.001). The areas under the curves were 0.76 and 0.78, and substantially lower for the model with PSA only (0.64 and 0.68 respectively). The model proved clinically useful for any decision threshold compared with a model with PSA only, PSA and DRE, or biopsying all men. A limitation is that the model is based on sextant biopsies results. Conclusions: The ERSPC risk calculator discriminated well between those with and without prostate cancer among initially screened men, but overestimated the risk of a positive biopsy. Further research is necessary to assess the performance and applicability of the ERSPC risk calculator when a clinical setting is considered rather than a screening setting. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) is considered to be prostate cancer (PCa) specific and highly overexpressed in cancer. Therefore a high PCA3 score should result in a high positive predictive value (PPV) and specificity for a positive biopsy. Objective: Our aim was to reevaluate, retest PCA3, and rebiopsy men with an initial PCA3 ≥100 and no PCa detected and compare the results with a random cohort of men with an initial PCA3<100. Design, setting, and participants: We invited men 63–75 yr of age with a PCA3 ≥100 for retesting and a control group with an initial PCA3<100 to participate in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, section Rotterdam. Interventions: Blood and urine sampling were used to determine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and PCA3. Prostate biopsies were performed if the PSA was ≥2.5ng/ml and/or the PCA3 score was ≥35. Measurements: We correlated the initial and reevaluated PCA3 scores. Our assessment of the PPV after rebiopsy was based on the newly determined PCA3 score. Results and limitations: After a mean study period of 19 mo, more cases of PCa were detected in rebiopsied men with initial PCA3 scores ≥100 than in the controls with PCA3 scores <100 (30.0% vs 18.8%). Combining initial and rebiopsy data resulted in a PPV of 52.2% in men with PCA3 ≥100. Over time, changes in PSA and PCA3 levels were quite different. Conclusions: In spite of our rescreened population, PPV and specificity were comparable with all reported studies of men with PCA3 scores ≥100. These findings do not explain why these PCA3 scores were excessively high in spite of the absence of biopsy-detectable PCa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Introduction: The prognosis of bladder cancer (BC) depends mainly on its histology, grade, and stage. Patients with superficial BC (70% of the urothelial carcinomas) have a relatively good prognosis, but patients diagnosed with invasive, high grade BC, and those who progress to invasive BC, have a poor prognosis and will not survive their disease in many cases due to their metastases, despite the currently available treatment options. Early detection can only be beneficial regarding mortality if the high risk cancers are recognized and treated at a localized stage. Materials and methods: Previous pilot studies on early detection consisted of home-based repeated hematuria testing and, in case of hematuria, a urologic evaluation with cytology and cystoscopy was carried out. This design resulted in too many cystoscopies. The recently initiated [Bladder Cancer Urine Marker Project (BLU-P) study www.blu-project.org] assesses the feasibility of a population-based screening for BC and at the same time evaluates a screening algorithm using next to hematuria testing, sensitive specific urine markers for BC (NMP22, FGFR3, MA analyses and MLPa) in an attempt to circumvent the high number of cystoscopies. Results: So far 1,611 men are included and 23.5% tested positive for hematuria (11.6% had one or more true positive test results). The additional molecular-based screening tests before referring to cystoscopy resulted in a decrease of the number of cystoscopies from 378 to 66 (82.5%). In those men referred for cystoscopy, so far only 1 BC case was detected. Conclusions: Further research is needed to evaluate whether this extremely low detection rate is caused by, e.g., a healthy screenee bias or that the additional selection step using the molecular urine tests is too strict and diagnoses are missed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The performance characteristics of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as a diagnostic test for prostate cancer (PCa) are poor. The performance of the PCa antigen 3 (PCA3) gene as a primary diagnostic is unknown. Objective: Assess the value of PCA3 as a first-line diagnostic test. Design, setting and participants: Participants included men aged 63–75 who were invited for rescreening in the period from September 2007 to February 2009 within the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer, Rotterdam section. Interventions: Lateral sextant biopsies were performed if the serum PSA value was ≥3.0ng/ml and/or the PCA3 score was ≥10. Measurements: Measurements included distribution and correlation of PSA value and PCA3 score and their relation to the number of cases and the characteristics of PCa detected. Additional value of PCA3 was included in men with previous negative biopsy and/or PSA <3.0ng/ml. Results and limitations: In 721 men, all biopsied, 122 PCa cases (16.9%) were detected. Correlation between PSA and PCA3 is poor (Spearman rank correlation: ρ=0.14; p <0.0001). A PSA ≥3.0ng/ml misses 64.7% of the total PCa that can be detected with the sextant biopsy technique and 57.9% of serious PCa (T2a or higher and/or Gleason grade ≥4, n =19), and 68.2% of biopsies could have been avoided; the respective data for PCA3 ≥35 are 32%, 26.3%, and 51.7%. Performance of PCA3 in men with low PSA (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.63) and/or previous negative biopsy (AUC: 0.68) is unclear but has limited reliability due to small numbers. Conclusions: PCA3 as a first-line screening test shows improvement of the performance characteristics and identification of serious disease compared with PSA in this prescreened population. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Most men with elevated levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) do not have prostate cancer, leading to a large number of unnecessary biopsies. A statistical model based on a panel of four kallikreins has been shown to predict the outcome of a first prostate biopsy. In this study, we apply the model to an independent data set of men with previous negative biopsy but persistently elevated PSA.Methods: The study cohort consisted of 925 men with a previous negative prostate biopsy and elevated PSA (>or=3 ng ml(-1)), with 110 prostate cancers detected (12%). A previously published statistical model was applied, with recalibration to reflect the lower positive biopsy rates on rebiopsy.Results: The full-kallikrein panel had higher discriminative accuracy than PSA and DRE alone, with area under the curve (AUC) improving from 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52, 0.64) to 0.68 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.74), P<0.001, and high-grade cancer (Gleason >or=7) at biopsy with AUC improving from 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.89) to 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.94), P=0.003). Application of the panel to 1000 men with persistently elevated PSA after initial negative biopsy, at a 15% risk threshold would reduce the number of biopsies by 712; would miss (or delay) the diagnosis of 53 cancers, of which only 3 would be Gleason 7 and the rest Gleason 6 or less.Conclusions: Our data constitute an external validation of a previously published model. The four-kallikrein panel predicts the result of repeat prostate biopsy in men with elevated PSA while dramatically decreasing unnecessary biopsies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Effect of dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer," by G. L. Andriole and colleagues in the April 1, 2010 issue.

Abstract: Background: The independent prognostic value of tumour volume in radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens is controversial, and it remains a matter of debate whether pathologists should report a measure of tumour volume. In addition, tumour volume might be of value in substaging of pathologic tumour stage (pT2) prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: To assess the prognostic value of PCa tumour volume. Design, setting, and participants: The cohort consisted of 344 participants in the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), Rotterdam section, whose PCa was treated with RP. Mean time of follow-up was 96.2 mo. Measurements: Tumour volume was measured in totally embedded RP specimens with a morphometric, computer-assisted method and assessed as a continuous variable, as relative tumour volume (tumour volume divided by prostate volume), and in a binary fashion (≥0.5ml or <0.5ml). These variables were related to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, local recurrence, or distant metastasis and PCa-related mortality using univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses. The analyses were repeated in the subgroup with pT2 tumours. Results and limitations: Tumour volume was related to tumour stage, Gleason score, seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and surgical margin status. In univariate analyses, tumour volume and relative tumour volume were predictive for all outcome variables. In multivariable analyses, including age, tumour stage, Gleason score, SVI, and surgical margin status, neither tumour volume nor relative volume were independent predictors of progression or mortality. Tumour volume ≥0.5ml was predictive for PSA recurrence and local and/or distant progression in univariate analyses but not in multivariable analyses. Tumour volume was not predictive for recurrence or mortality in univariate or multivariable analyses in the pT2 subgroup. Conclusions: Tumour volume did not add prognostic value to routinely assessed pathologic parameters. Therefore, there seems to be little reason to routinely measure tumour volume in RP specimens. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

BACKGROUND: Population-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. To help men making informed decisions about prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening a risk indicator (www.uroweb.org) was developed. This risk indicator is embedded in a leaflet that informs men about the pros and cons of PCa screening and enables calculation of the individual risk of having a biopsy detectable PCa. AIM: To assess the effect of providing a leaflet including individualized risk estimation on informed decision making of men, i.e. knowledge about PCa and PSA screening, attitude towards undergoing a PSA test and intention to have a PSA test. METHODS: An intervention study among 2000 men, aged 55-65 years, randomly selected from the population registry of the city of Dordrecht, the Netherlands, in 2008. Men were sent a questionnaire on knowledge of PCa, attitude and intention to have a PSA test. Men without a history of (screening for) PCa were sent the leaflet and Questionnaire 2 within 2 weeks after returning Questionnaire 1. Validated health and anxiety measures were used. RESULTS: One thousand and twenty seven of 2000 men completed Questionnaire 1 (51%), of whom 298 were excluded due to a history of (screening for) PCa. Of the 729 remaining men, 601 completed Questionnaire 2 as well. At the second assessment significantly more men met the requirements of informed decision making (15% versus 33%, p<0.001), more men had relevant knowledge (284/601, 50% versus 420/601, 77%, p<0.001) and the intention to have a PSA test had increased (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Providing information on PCa screening combined with individualized risk estimation enhanced informed decision making and may be used for shared decision making on PSA screening of physicians and patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Population-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. To help men making informed decisions about prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening a risk indicator (www.uroweb.org) was developed. This risk indicator is embedded in a leaflet that informs men about the pros and cons of PCa screening and enables calculation of the individual risk of having a biopsy detectable PCa. Aim: To assess the effect of providing a leaflet including individualized risk estimation on informed decision making of men, i.e. knowledge about PCa and PSA screening, attitude towards undergoing a PSA test and intention to have a PSA test. Methods: An intervention study among 2000 men, aged 55–65years, randomly selected from the population registry of the city of Dordrecht, the Netherlands, in 2008. Men were sent a questionnaire on knowledge of PCa, attitude and intention to have a PSA test. Men without a history of (screening for) PCa were sent the leaflet and Questionnaire 2 within 2weeks after returning Questionnaire 1. Validated health and anxiety measures were used. Results: One thousand and twenty seven of 2000 men completed Questionnaire 1 (51%), of whom 298 were excluded due to a history of (screening for) PCa. Of the 729 remaining men, 601 completed Questionnaire 2 as well. At the second assessment significantly more men met the requirements of informed decision making (15% versus 33%, p <0.001), more men had relevant knowledge (284/601, 50% versus 420/601, 77%, p <0.001) and the intention to have a PSA test had increased (p <0.001). Conclusions: Providing information on PCa screening combined with individualized risk estimation enhanced informed decision making and may be used for shared decision making on PSA screening of physicians and patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]