Search

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature regarding the reliability and validity of assessment methods available in primary care for bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). DESIGN: Systematic review with best evidence synthesis. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Men with LUTS due to bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction. REVIEW METHODS: PubMed, Ebsco/CINAHL and Embase databases were searched for studies on the validity and reliability of assessment methods for bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic obstruction in primary care. Methodological quality was assessed with the COSMIN checklist. Studies with poor methodology were excluded from the best evidence synthesis. RESULTS: Of the 5644 studies identified, 61 were scored with the COSMIN checklist, 37 studies were included in the best evidence synthesis, 18 evaluated bladder outlet obstruction and 17 benign prostatic obstruction, 2 evaluated both. Overall, reliability was poorly evaluated. Transrectal and transabdominal ultrasound showed moderate to good validity to evaluate bladder outlet obstruction. Measured prostate volume with these ultrasound methods, to identify benign prostatic obstruction, showed moderate to good accuracy, supported by a moderate to high level of evidence. Uroflowmetry for bladder outlet obstruction showed poor to moderate diagnostic accuracy, depending on used cut-off values. Questionnaires were supported by high-quality evidence, although correlations and diagnostic accuracy were poor to moderate compared with criterion tests. Other methods were supported by low level evidence. CONCLUSION: Clinicians in primary care can incorporate transabdominal and transrectal ultrasound or uroflowmetry in the evaluation of men with LUTS but should not solely rely on these methods as the diagnostic accuracy is insufficient and reliability remains insufficiently researched. Low-to-moderate levels of evidence for most assessment methods were due to methodological shortcomings and inconsistency in the studies. This highlights the need for better study designs in this domain.

ObjectiveAlthough surveillance after radical prostatectomy routinely includes repeated prostate specific antigen (PSA)-testing for many years, biochemical recurrence often occurs without further clinical progression. We therefore hypothesised that follow-up can be shortened for many patients without increasing the risk of prostate cancer death. We investigated the long-term probabilities of PSA recurrence, metastases and prostate cancer death in patients without biochemical recurrence five and 10 years after radical prostatectomy.DesignProspective cohort study. Stratification by Gleason score (≤3+4=7 or ≥4+3=7), pathological tumour stage (pT2 or ≥pT3) and negative or positive surgical margins.SettingBetween 1989 and 1998, 14 urological centres in Scandinavia randomised patients to the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group study number 4 (SPCG-4) trial.ParticipationAll 306 patients from the SPCG-4 trial who underwent radical prostatectomy within 1 year from inclusion were eligible. Four patients were excluded due to surgery-related death (n=1) or salvage radiotherapy or hormonal treatment within 6 weeks from surgery (n=3).Primary outcome measuresCumulative incidences and absolute differences in metastatic disease and prostate cancer death.ResultsWe analysed 302 patients with complete follow-up during a median of 24 years. Median preoperative PSA was 9.8 ng/mL and median age was 65 years. For patients without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy the 20-year probability of biochemical recurrence was 25% among men with Gleason score ≤3+4=7 and 57% among men with Gleason score ≥4+3=7; the probabilities for metastases were 0.8% and 17%; and for prostate cancer death 0.8% and 12%, respectively. The long-term probabilities were higher for pT ≥3 versus pT2 and for positive versus negative surgical margins. Limitations include small size of the cohort.ConclusionMany patients with favourable histopathology without biochemical recurrence 5 years after radical prostatectomy could stop follow-up earlier than 10 years after radical prostatectomy.

Funder: Wellcome Trust, OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand and explore patient and general practitioner (GP) experiences of 'traditional' and 'one-stop' prostate cancer diagnostic pathways in England. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews, analysed using inductive thematic analysis SETTING: Patients were recruited from National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in London and in Devon; GPs were recruited via National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Networks. Interviews were conducted in person or via telephone. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who had undergone a MRI scan of the prostate as part of their diagnostic work-up for possible prostate cancer, and GPs who had referred at least one patient for possible prostate cancer in the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: 22 patients (aged 47-80 years) and 10 GPs (6 female, aged 38-58 years) were interviewed. Patients described three key themes: cancer beliefs in relation to patient's attitudes towards prostate cancer;communication with their GP and specialist having a significant impact on experience of the pathway and pathway experience being influenced by appointment and test burden. GP interview themes included: the challenges of dealing with imperfect information in the current pathway; managing uncertainty in identifying patients with possible prostate cancer and sharing this uncertainty with them, and other social, cultural and personal contextual influences. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and GPs reported a range of experiences and views of the current prostate cancer diagnostic pathways in England. Patients valued 'one-stop' pathways integrating prostate MRI and diagnostic consultations with specialists over the more traditional approach of several hospital appointments. GPs remain uncertain how best to identify patients needing referral for urgent prostate cancer testing due to the lack of accurate triage and risk assessment strategies.

ObjectivesTo identify consensus on patient prioritisation for rectal hydrogel spacer use during radiation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer in the UK.DesignDelphi study consisting of two rounds of online questionnaires, two virtual advisory board meetings and a final online questionnaire.SettingRadical radiation therapy for localised and locally advanced prostate cancer in the UK.ParticipantsSix leading clinical oncologists and one urologist from across the UK.InterventionsRectal hydrogel spacer.Primary and secondary outcome measuresNone reported.ResultsThe panel reached consensus on the importance of minimising toxicity for treatments with curative intent and that even low-grade toxicity-related adverse events can significantly impact quality of life. There was agreement that despite meeting rectal dose constraints, too many patients experience rectal toxicity and that rectal hydrogel spacers in eligible patients significantly reduces toxicity-related adverse events. However, as a consequence of funding limitations, patients need to be prioritised for spacer use. A higher benefit of spacers can be expected in patients on anticoagulation and in patients with diabetes or inflammatory bowel disease, but consensus could not be reached regarding patient groups expected to benefit less. While radiation therapy regimen is not a main factor determining prioritisation, higher benefit is expected in ultrahypofractionated regimens.ConclusionThere is a strong and general agreement that all patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical radiation therapy have the potential to benefit from hydrogel spacers. Currently, not all patients who could potentially benefit can access hydrogel spacers, and access is unequal. Implementation of the consensus recommendations would likely help prioritise and equalise access to rectal spacers for patients in the UK.

ObjectivesTo systematically review the literature regarding the reliability and validity of assessment methods available in primary care for bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).DesignSystematic review with best evidence synthesis.SettingPrimary care.ParticipantsMen with LUTS due to bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction.Review methodsPubMed, Ebsco/CINAHL and Embase databases were searched for studies on the validity and reliability of assessment methods for bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic obstruction in primary care. Methodological quality was assessed with the COSMIN checklist. Studies with poor methodology were excluded from the best evidence synthesis.ResultsOf the 5644 studies identified, 61 were scored with the COSMIN checklist, 37 studies were included in the best evidence synthesis, 18 evaluated bladder outlet obstruction and 17 benign prostatic obstruction, 2 evaluated both. Overall, reliability was poorly evaluated. Transrectal and transabdominal ultrasound showed moderate to good validity to evaluate bladder outlet obstruction. Measured prostate volume with these ultrasound methods, to identify benign prostatic obstruction, showed moderate to good accuracy, supported by a moderate to high level of evidence. Uroflowmetry for bladder outlet obstruction showed poor to moderate diagnostic accuracy, depending on used cut-off values. Questionnaires were supported by high-quality evidence, although correlations and diagnostic accuracy were poor to moderate compared with criterion tests. Other methods were supported by low level evidence.ConclusionClinicians in primary care can incorporate transabdominal and transrectal ultrasound or uroflowmetry in the evaluation of men with LUTS but should not solely rely on these methods as the diagnostic accuracy is insufficient and reliability remains insufficiently researched. Low-to-moderate levels of evidence for most assessment methods were due to methodological shortcomings and inconsistency in the studies. This highlights the need for better study designs in this domain.

IntroductionBlood cholesterol is likely a risk factor for prostate cancer prognosis and use of statins is associated with lowered risk of prostate cancer recurrence and progression. Furthermore, use of statins has been associated with prolonged time before development of castration resistance (CR) during androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer. However, the efficacy of statins on delaying castration-resistance has not been tested in a randomised placebo-controlled setting.This study aims to test statins’ efficacy compared to placebo in delaying development of CR during ADT treatment for primary metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer. Secondary aim is to explore effect of statin intervention on prostate cancer mortality and lipid metabolism during ADT.Methods and analysisIn this randomised placebo-controlled trial, a total of 400 men with de novo metastatic prostate cancer or recurrent disease after primary treatment and starting ADT will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to use daily 80 mg of atorvastatin or placebo. All researchers, study nurses and patients will be blinded throughout the trial. Patients are followed until disease recurrence or death. Primary outcome is time to formation of CR after initiation of ADT. Serum lipid levels (total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and trigyserides) are analysed to test whether changes in serum cholesterol parameters during ADT predict length of treatment response. Furthermore, the trial will compare quality of life, cardiovascular morbidity, changes in blood glucose and circulating cell-free DNA, and urine lipidome during trial.Ethics and disseminationThis study is approved by the Regional ethics committees of the Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Science centre, Tampere, Finland (R18065M) and Tarto University Hospital, Tarto, Estonia (319/T-6). All participants read and sign informed consent form before study entry. After publication of results for the primary endpoints, anonymised summary metadata and statistical code will be made openly available. The data will not include any information that could make it possible to identify a given participant.Trial registration numberClinicaltrial.gov:NCT04026230, Eudra-CT: 2016-004774-17, protocol code: ESTO2, protocol date 10 September 2020 and version 6.

IntroductionImmunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) has revolutionised cancer treatment but has no convincing effect in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). It has been suggested that a combination of CPI and hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may work synergistically, and recent trials have supported this. We hypothesise that adding SBRT to CPI treatment can improve response rates in patients with mCRPC.Methods and analysisThe CheckPRO trial is an open-label, randomised, two-stage, phase II trial. We aim to enrol and randomise 80 evaluable patients with mCRPC who progressed following ≥2 lines of treatment. Enrolment started in November 2019 with 38 months expected enrolment period. The participants receive treatment for 52 weeks including four cycles of ipilimumab and nivolumab with or without concomitant SBRT (24 Gray in three fractions) to a single soft tissue or bone metastasis, followed by 10 cycles of nivolumab. Participants are followed until progression, death, or for 12 months after the end of treatment.Co-primary endpoints are the objective response rate and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate. Secondary endpoints include safety, radiographic progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate, duration of response, PSA-progression-free survival beyond 12 weeks, quality of life and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints include translational analyses of tumour biopsies and consecutive blood samples. Biopsies from metastatic sites are collected at baseline, before the third treatment and at the end of treatment. Blood sampling for immune monitoring and circulating tumour DNA is performed consecutively at baseline and every radiographic assessment.Ethics and disseminationThis study follows the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the Danish Ethics Committee System (journal no. H-19016100). All participants must receive written and oral information and provide a signed informed consent document prior to inclusion. The study results will be published in an international peer-review journal.Trial registration numberEudraCT number: 2018-003461-34. clinicaltrials.gov IDNCT05655715.

IntroductionThe introduction of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has improved almost every aspect of the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. However, the novel imaging technique, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA PET) may have demonstrable accuracy in detecting and staging prostate cancer. Here, we describe a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing mpMRI to PSMA PET for the diagnosis of suspected prostate cancer.Methods and analysisA systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane databases will be conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will be followed for screening, data extraction, statistical analysis and reporting. Included papers will be full-text articles providing original data, written in English articles and comparing the use of PSMA PET with mpMRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. All studies published between July 1977 and March 2021 will be eligible for inclusion. Study bias and quality will be assessed using Quadas-2 score. To ensure the quality of the reporting of studies, this protocol is written following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required for this systematic review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at both national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021239296.

ObjectivesVasohibin-1 (VASH1) is an endogenous angiogenesis regulator expressed in activated vascular endothelial cells. We previously reported that high VASH1 expression is a predictor of progression in acinar adenocarcinoma of the prostate. In this study, we evaluated the characteristics of ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate by comparing the level of VASH1 expression between ductal and acinar adenocarcinoma specimens.Design and settingA retrospective cohort study at two centres in Japan.ParticipantsAmong the 1495 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection for the past 15 years, a total of 14 patients diagnosed with ductal adenocarcinoma and 20 patients diagnosed with acinar adenocarcinoma with a Gleason score of 4+4 were included.InterventionsWe immunohistochemically examined the CD34 expression as the microvessel density (MVD) and activated endothelial cells as the VASH1 density (vessels per mm2).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the association of MVD and VASH1 density between ductal and acinar adenocarcinoma, and the secondary outcome was their oncological outcomes.ResultsNine patients (64.3%) with ductal adenocarcinoma were diagnosed at an advanced clinical stage, and five patients (35.7%) died from cancer during a median follow-up of 56.0 months. The VASH1 densities (mean±SD) in ductal and acinar adenocarcinoma were 45.1±18.5 vs 16.1±21.0 (pConclusionsDuctal adenocarcinoma was more aggressive and had higher VASH1 expression than acinar adenocarcinoma, although MVD was equivalent. These results indicate that VASH1 expression may serve as a novel biomarker for the aggressive nature of ductal adenocarcinoma.

IntroductionThis paper presents a study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide in clinical practice, two cancer drugs given to patients suffering from advanced prostate cancer.Method and analysisThe protocol designs a comparative-effectiveness analysis of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide. With the substantial number of covariates a two-step procedure is suggested in choosing relevant covariates in the matching design. In the first step, an exploratory factor analysis reduces the dimension of a large set of continuous covariates to nine factors. In the second step, we reduce the dimension of the covariates, interactions and second order terms for the continuous covariates using propensity score estimation. The final design makes use of a genetic matching algorithm. The study protocol provides a detailed statistical analysis plan of the analysis sample derived from the matching design. The analysis will make use of linear regression and robust inference adjusted for multisignificance testing.DiscussionAs in a randomised experiment the focus is on the design of the assignment to treatment. This allows the publication of this preanalysis plan before having access to outcome data. This means that the p values will be correct if the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness is valid. Given that is p-hacking is substantial problem in empirical research, this is a substantial strength of this study. However, while design yields, balance on the observed covariates one cannot discard the possibility that unobserved confounders are not balanced. For that reason, sensitivity tests for the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness are presented.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Uppsala, Sweden (Dnr 2017/482). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and distributed to relevant stakeholders in healthcare.

IntroductionRadiotherapy is the most common curative treatment for non-metastatic prostate cancer; however, up to 13% of patients will develop local recurrence within 10 years. Patients can undergo further and potentially curative treatment including salvage surgery, brachytherapy (BT), external beam radiotherapy, high-intensity focused ultrasound and cryotherapy. Systematic review shows that high-dose-rate (HDR) BT and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) have the best outcomes in terms of biochemical control and lowest side effects. The reirradiation options for previously irradiated prostate cancer (RO-PIP) trial aims to determine the feasibility of recruitment to a trial randomising patients to salvage HDR-BT or SBRT and provide prospective data on patient recorded toxicity outcomes that will inform a future phase III trial.Methods and analysisThe primary endpoint of the RO-PIP feasibility study is to evaluate the patient recruitment potential over 2 years to a trial randomising to either SBRT or HDR-BT for patients who develop local recurrence of prostate cancer following previous radiation therapy. The aim is to recruit 60 patients across 3 sites over 2 years and randomise 1:1 to SBRT or HDR-BT. Secondary objectives include recording clinician and patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate treatment-related toxicity. In addition, the study aims to identify potential imaging, genomic and proteomic biomarkers that are predictive of toxicity and outcome based on hypoxia status, a prognostic marker of prostate cancer.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Yorkshire and The Humber—Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 21/YH/0305, IRAS: 297060, January 2022). The results will be presented in national and international conferences, published in peer-reviewed journals and will be communicated to relevant stakeholders. A plain English report will be shared with the study participants, patients’ organisations and media.Trial registration numberISRCTN 12238218 (Amy Ackroyd NIHR CPMS Team).

ObjectivesWith novel antiandrogen treatments of varying clinical benefits and risks becoming available, this study investigates how patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) value differences in treatment characteristics.DesignCross-sectional observational study.SettingA discrete choice experiment was conducted. Patients chose between two hypothetical non-metastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) treatments defined by six attributes: risk of fatigue, falls or fracture, cognitive impairment, hypertension, rashes as side effects to treatment and extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs.ParticipantsA total of 137 adult male patients with CRPC with no prior experience with chemotherapy and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0–1 were recruited. Patients were excluded if they participated in an investigational programme outside of routine clinical practice, had a clinically relevant medical or psychiatric condition, or diagnosis of visceral/other metastases not related to the prostate, or were otherwise deemed ineligible by the referring physician.Primary outcome measuresRelative preference weights and relative importance of the attributes was estimated by hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression.ResultsAmong the treatment attributes, ‘risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment’ was the most important attribute (relative importance (RI) (95% CI): 27.47% (24.80% to 30.14%)), followed by ‘extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs’ (RI (95% CI): 17.87% (15.49% to 20.25%)) and the ‘risk of falls or fracture’ (RI (95% CI): 15.99% (14.73% to 17.25%)). The ‘risk of hypertension as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 13.77% (12.73% to 14.81%)) had similar RI as ‘risk of rashes as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 13.17% (12.15% to 14.19%)), followed by the ‘risk of fatigue as a side effect of treatment’ (RI (95% CI): 11.74% (10.75% to 12.73%)).ConclusionsPatients consider the risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment as the most important attribute in nmCRPC, followed by the extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs, and the risk of falls and fracture. These features should be considered in treatment decision making for nmCRPC in Japan.

BACKGROUNDS: The number of practicing female urologists is rising. The aim of this study is to evaluate the acceptance of female urologists by male patients and their partners. METHODS: Men who underwent a prostate MRI or a prostate biopsy between January and December 2018 and their partners, were sent questionnaires prior to the examination. Two types of questionnaires were used. One questionnaire asked “I want to be seen by: (I) a male urologist or (II) a female urologist or (III) no preference” (Group(np)), the other questionnaire only offered two possible answers: “I want to be seen by: (I) a male urologist or (II) a female urologist” (Group(m,f)). All other questions were on prostate MRI and prostate biopsies. RESULTS: Overall, 377 questionnaires were sent to patients. One hundred and ninety-six questionnaires (52.0%) were returned. In Group(np), 34.7% wanted to be seen by a male urologist, 60.8% of patients chose “no preference”. The answers of the patients’ female partners in Group(np) did not differ statistically significant (57.3% chose “no preference”, 0% chose a female urologist). In Group(m,f), 54.5% of patients preferred a male urologist, one patient wanted to be seen by a female urologist, 44.3% did not answer the question. In Group(m,f), there was no statistically significant difference in preference in regard to the doctor’s gender between the patients and their female partners (57% of partners wanted a male urologist, 0% wanted a female urologist). CONCLUSIONS: A large number of patients with prostate disease and their partners prefer male urologists rather than female urologists.

ObjectivesTo examine the risk of type 2 diabetes in patients with prostate cancer and its association with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).Design and participantsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer in the Lithuanian male population between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2012 who were identified through the Lithuanian Cancer registry. All prostate cancer cases were linked to the National Health Insurance Fund database to obtain information regarding the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and information on prescriptions of antiandrogens and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. Patients with prostate cancer were followed up until the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, or 31 December 2017, or date of death, whichever came first. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of type 2 diabetes in patients with prostate cancer with or without ADT exposure.Results27 580 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer, out of whom 14 502 (52.6%) did not receive ADT and 13 078 (47.4%) were treated with ADT. The incidence of type 2 diabetes for all patients with prostate cancer was 7.4/1000 person-years, for men on GnRH agonists 9.0/1000 person-years and 5.8/1000 person-years for men on antiandrogens. There was an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes comparing ADT users and non-users (HR=1.49, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.66).ConclusionThis study showed an increased risk of diabetes in patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT in comparison to ADT-free patient cohort. GnRH agonist users showed higher susceptibility, while the group on antiandrogen monotherapy showed no such increase.

IntroductionA novel method for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) called Aquablation has become commercially available. Previous studies have been able to show similar functional results when compared with transurethral resection of the prostate and a high efficacy has been demonstrated when this approach is applied to patients with a prostate size of 80–150 cm3.Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a well-established procedure in the surgical treatment of BPH in prostate glands larger than 30 mL and a first-line therapy in glands over 80 mL. To date, no data are available whether Aquablation is non-inferior compared with HoLEP in the treatment of patients with medium-to-large-sized prostates regarding safety and efficacy.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial conducted at a Swiss centre of tertiary care. The primary outcome is assessment of non-inferiority of Aquablation compared with HoLEP in reducing lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Randomisation will be performed using secuTrial, stratifying on age (Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the local ethics committee (EKOS 2020-02353). Results of the primary endpoint and each of the secondary endpoints will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04560907).

IntroductionThere is an increasing body of evidence to suggest that visibility of prostate cancer on magnetic resonance (MRI) may be related to likelihood of adverse pathological outcomes. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy remains a significant clinical challenge and a means of predicting likelihood of this prior to surgery could inform treatment choice. It appears that MRI could be a potential candidate strategy for BCR prediction, and as such, there is a need to review extant literature on the prognostic capability of MRI. Here, we describe a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of the utility of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) in predicting BCR following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer treatment.Methods and analysisPubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases will be searched and screening will be guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. In order to meet the inclusion criteria, papers must be English-language articles involving patients who have had bpMRI or mpMRI for suspected prostate cancer and have undergone radical prostatectomy as definitive therapy. Patients must have had prostate-specific antigen monitoring before and after surgery. All relevant papers published from July 1977 to October 2020 will be eligible for inclusion. The Newcastle-Ottawa score will be used to determine the quality and bias of the studies. This protocol is written in-line with the PRISMA protocol 2015 checklist.Ethics and disseminationThere are no relevant ethical concerns. Dissemination of this protocol will be via peer-reviewed journals as well as national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020206074.

IntroductionProstate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in Canadian men. Current models of survivorship care are no longer adequate to address the chronic and complex survivorship needs of patients today. Virtual care models for cancer survivorship have recently been associated with comparable clinical outcomes and lower costs to traditional follow-up care, with patients favouring off-site and on-demand visits. Building on their viability, our research group conceived the Ned Clinic—a virtual PCa survivorship model that provides patients with access to lab results, collects patient-reported outcomes, alerts clinicians to emerging issues, and promotes patient self-care. Despite the promise of the Ned Clinic, the model remains limited by its dependence on oncology specialists, lack of an autonomous triage algorithm, and has only been implemented among PCa survivors living in Ontario.Methods and analysisOur programme of research comprises two main research objectives: (1) to evaluate the process and cost of implementing and sustaining five nurse-led virtual PCa survivorship clinics in three provinces across Canada and identify barriers and facilitators to implementation success and (2) to assess the impact of these virtual clinics on implementation and effectiveness outcomes of enrolled PCa survivors. The design phase will involve developing an autonomous triage algorithm and redesigning the Ned Clinic towards a nurse-led service model. Site-specific implementation plans will be developed to deploy a localised nurse-led virtual clinic at each centre. Effectiveness will be evaluated using a historical control study comparing the survivorship outcomes of 300 PCa survivors enrolled in the Ned Clinic with 300 PCa survivors receiving traditional follow-up care.Ethics and disseminationAppropriate site-specific ethics approval will be secured prior to each research phase. Knowledge translation efforts will include diffusion, dissemination, and application approaches to ensure that knowledge is translated to both academic and lay audiences.

IntroductionSurvival in men diagnosed with de novo synchronous metastatic prostate cancer has increased following the use of upfront systemic treatment, using chemotherapy and other novel androgen receptor targeted agents, in addition to standard androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Local cytoreductive and metastasis-directed interventions are hypothesised to confer additional survival benefit. In this setting, IP2-ATLANTA will explore progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes with the addition of sequential multimodal local and metastasis-directed treatments compared with standard care alone.MethodsA phase II, prospective, multicentre, three-arm randomised controlled trial incorporating an embedded feasibility pilot. All men with new histologically diagnosed, hormone-sensitive, metastatic prostate cancer, within 4 months of commencing ADT and of performance status 0 to 2 are eligible. Patients will be randomised to Control (standard of care (SOC)) OR Intervention 1 (minimally invasive ablative therapy to prostate±pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND)) OR Intervention 2 (cytoreductive radical prostatectomy±PLND OR prostate radiotherapy±pelvic lymph node radiotherapy (PLNRT)). Metastatic burden will be prespecified using the Chemohormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease (CHAARTED) definition. Men with low burden disease in intervention arms are eligible for metastasis-directed therapy, in the form of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery. Standard systemic therapy will be administered in all arms with ADT±upfront systemic chemotherapy or androgen receptor agents. Patients will be followed-up for a minimum of 2 years. Primary outcome: PFS. Secondary outcomes include predictive factors for PFS and overall survival; urinary, sexual and rectal side effects. Embedded feasibility sample size is 80, with 918 patients required in the main phase II component. Study recruitment commenced in April 2019, with planned follow-up completed by April 2024.Ethics and disseminationApproved by the Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee Wales-5 (19/WA0005). Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03763253; ISCRTN58401737

ObjectivesTo confirm the association of previously reported prognostic factors with future progression of localised prostate cancer using primary care data and identify new potential prognostic factors for further assessment in prognostic model development and validation.DesignRetrospective cohort study, employing Cox proportional hazards regression controlling for age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), and Gleason score, was stratified by diagnostic stage.SettingPrimary care in England.ParticipantsMales with localised prostate cancer diagnosedbetween 01/01/1987 and 31/12/2016 within the Clinical Practice ResearchDatalink database, with linked data from the National Cancer Registration andAnalysis Service and Office for National Statistics.Primary and secondary outcomesPrimary outcome measure was prostate cancer mortality. Secondary outcome measures were all-cause mortality and commencing systemic therapy. Up-staging after diagnosis was not used as a secondary outcome owing to significant missing data.Results10 901 men (mean age 74.38±9.03 years) with localised prostate cancer were followed up for a mean of 14.12 (±6.36) years. 2331 (21.38%) men underwent systemic therapy and 3450 (31.65%) died, including 1250 (11.47%) from prostate cancer. Factors associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer mortality included age; high PSA; current or ex-smoker; ischaemic heart disease; high C reactive protein; high ferritin; low haemoglobin; high blood glucose and low albumin.ConclusionsThis study identified several new potential prognostic factors for prostate cancer progression, as well as confirming some known prognostic factors, in an independent primary care data set. Further research is needed to develop and validate a prognostic model for prostate cancer progression.

IntroductionAs part of the PIONEER (Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Enhancement Through the Power of Big Data in Europe) Consortium, we will explore which diagnostic and prognostic factors (DPFs) are currently being researched to previously defined clinical and patient-reported outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa).Methods and analysisThis research project will follow the following four steps: (1) a broad systematic literature review of DPFs for all stages of PCa, covering evidence from 2014 onwards; (2) discussion of systematic review findings by a multidisciplinary expert panel; (3) risk of bias assessment and applicability with Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool (QUIPS) and (4) additional quantitative assessments if required.Ethics and disseminationWe aim to develop an online tool to present the DPFs identified in this research and make them available across all stakeholders. There are no ethical implications.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to report on the practice patterns and challenges of performing and interpreting prostate MRI. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. An electronic survey regarding prostate MRI practice patterns and challenges was sent to members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology. RESULTS. The response rate was 15% (212/1446). Most (65%) of the respondents were academic abdominal radiologists with 1–5 (52%), 6–10 (20%), 11–20 (15%), and more than 20 (5%) years of experience in reporting prostate MRI. The numbers of prostate MRI examinations reported per week were 0–5 (43%), 6–10 (38%), 11–20 (12%), 21–30 (5%), and more than 30 (2%). Imaging was performed at 3 T (58%), 1.5 T (20%), or either (21%), and most examinations (83%) were performed without an endorectal coil. Highest b values ranged from 800 to 5000 s/mm(2); 1400 s/mm(2) (26%) and 1500 s/mm(2) (30%) were the most common. Most respondents (79%) acquired dynamic contrast-enhanced images with temporal resolution of less than 10 seconds. Most (71%) of the prostate MRI studies were used for fusion biopsy. PI-RADS version 2 was used by 92% of the respondents and template reporting by 80%. Challenges to performing and interpreting prostate MRI were scored on a 1–5 Likert scale (1, easy; 2, somewhat easy; 3, neutral; 4, somewhat difficult; 5, very difficult). The median scores were 2 or 3 for patient preparatory factors. Image acquisition and reporting factors were scored 1–2, except for performing spectroscopy or using an endorectal coil, both of which scored 4. Acquiring patient history scored 2 and quality factors scored 3. CONCLUSION. Most radiologists perform prostate MRI at 3 T without an endorectal coil and interpret the images using PI-RADS version 2. Challenges include obtaining quality images, acquiring feedback, and variability in the interpretation of PI-RADS scores.

IntroductionThe classical pathway for diagnosing prostate cancer is systematic 12-core biopsy under the guidance of transrectal ultrasound, which tends to underdiagnose the clinically significant tumour and overdiagnose the insignificant disease. Another pathway named targeted biopsy is using multiparametric MRI to localise the tumour precisely and then obtain the samples from the suspicious lesions. Targeted biopsy, which is mainly divided into cognitive fusion method and software-based fusion method, is getting prevalent for its good performance in detecting significant cancer. However, the preferred targeted biopsy technique in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer between cognitive fusion and software-based fusion is still beyond consensus.Methods and analysisThis trial is a prospective, single-centre, randomised controlled and non-inferiority study in which all men suspicious to have clinically significant prostate cancer are included. This study aims to determine whether a novel three-dimensional matrix positioning cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy is non-inferior to software-based fusion-targeted biopsy in the detection rate of clinically significant cancer in men without a prior biopsy. The main inclusion criteria are men with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen above 4–20 ng/mL or with an abnormal digital rectal examination and have never had a biopsy before. A sample size of 602 participants allowing for a 10% loss will be recruited. All patients will undergo a multiparametric MRI examination, and those who fail to be found with a suspicious lesion, with the anticipation of half of the total number, will be dropped. The remaining participants will be randomly allocated to cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy (n=137) and software-based fusion-targeted biopsy (n=137). The primary outcome is the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer for cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy and software-based fusion-targeted biopsy in men without a prior biopsy. The clinically significant prostate cancer will be defined as the International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 or higher.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the ethics committee of Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. The results of the study will be disseminated and published in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04271527).

Organ morphology is a key indicator for prostate disease diagnosis and prognosis. For instance, In longitudinal study of prostate cancer patients under active surveillance, the volume, boundary smoothness and their changes are closely monitored on time-series MR image data. In this paper, we describe a new framework for forecasting prostate morphological changes, as the ability to detect such changes earlier than what is currently possible may enable timely treatment or avoiding unnecessary confirmatory biopsies. In this work, an efficient feature-based MR image registration is first developed to align delineated prostate gland capsules to quantify the morphological changes using the inferred dense displacement fields (DDFs). We then propose to use kernel density estimation (KDE) of the probability density of the DDF-represented \textit{future morphology changes}, between current and future time points, before the future data become available. The KDE utilises a novel distance function that takes into account morphology, stage-of-progression and duration-of-change, which are considered factors in such subject-specific forecasting. We validate the proposed approach on image masks unseen to registration network training, without using any data acquired at the future target time points. The experiment results are presented on a longitudinal data set with 331 images from 73 patients, yielding an average Dice score of 0.865 on a holdout set, between the ground-truth and the image masks warped by the KDE-predicted-DDFs., Accepted by ISBI 2021

IntroductionActive surveillance (AS) for patients with prostate cancer (PC) with low risk of PC death is an alternative to radical treatment. A major drawback of AS is the uncertainty whether a patient truly has low risk PC based on biopsy alone. Multiparametric MRI scan together with biopsy, appears useful in separating patients who need curative therapy from those for whom AS may be safe. Two small clinical trials have shown short-term high-dose vitamin D supplementation may prevent PC progression. There is no substantial evidence for its long-term safety and efficacy, hence its use in the care of men with PC on AS needs assessment. This protocol describes the ProsD clinical trial which aims to determine if oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation taken monthly for 2 years can prevent PC progression in cases with low-to-intermediate risk of progression.Method and analysisThis is an Australian national multicentre, 2:1 double-blinded placebo-controlled phase II randomised controlled trial of monthly oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation (50 000 IU cholecalciferol), in men diagnosed with localised PC who have low-to-intermediate risk of disease progression and are being managed by AS. This trial will assess the feasibility, efficacy and safety of supplementing men with an initial oral loading dose of 500 000 IU cholecalciferol, followed by a monthly oral dose of 50 000 IU during the 24 months of AS. The primary trial outcome is the commencement of active therapy for clinical or non-clinical reason, within 2 years of AS.Ethics and disseminationThis trial is approved by Bellberry Ethics Committee (2016-06-459). All results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberACTRN12616001707459.

IntroductionPostembolisation syndrome (PES) is the most common side effect of vascular embolisation of solid organs. Although prophylactic corticosteroids are known to reduce the incidence and severity of PES, no trials investigating their efficacy have been conducted in men undergoing prostatic artery embolisation (PAE). We postulate that steroids can have a similar effect in reducing PES after PAE. This paper describes the rationale and detailed protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of dexamethasone (DEXA) in reducing PES after PAE.Methods and analysisIn this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we will enrol 60 individuals undergoing PAE for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Participants will be randomised to receive IV DEXA (24 mg) or placebo (saline). The primary outcomes will be postprocedural fever, pain and quality of life. The secondary outcomes will include postprocedural nausea, postprocedural medicine usage, laboratory parameters (C reactive protein, prostate-specific antigen) and early PAE results.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Danish Committee on Health Research Ethics in the Capital Region (H-20025910). The results from this trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and national and international presentations.Trial registration numberClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04588857; EudraCT number: 2020-000915-53.

Automated disease classification could significantly improve the accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis on MRI, which is a difficult task even for trained experts. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown some promising results for disease classification on multi-parametric MRI. However, CNNs struggle to extract robust global features about the anatomy which may provide important contextual information for further improving classification accuracy. Here, we propose a novel multi-scale hybrid CNN/transformer architecture with the ability of better contextualising local features at different scales. In our application, we found this to significantly improve performance compared to using CNNs. Classification accuracy is even further improved with a stacked ensemble yielding promising results for binary classification of prostate lesions into clinically significant or non-significant.

ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) following initial negative systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed and Embase were searched using a string combination with keywords/Medical Subject Headings terms and free text in the search builder. Date of search was 13 April 2020.Study selectionStudies addressing PCSM following initial negative TRUS biopsies. Randomised controlled trials and population-based studies including men with initial negative TRUS biopsies reported in English from 1990 until present were included.Data extractionData extraction was done using a predefined form by two authors independently and compared with confirm data; risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for cohort studies when applicable.ResultsFour eligible studies were identified. Outcomes were reported differently in the studies as both cumulative incidence and Kaplan-Meier estimates have been used. Regardless of the study differences, all studies reported low estimated incidence of PCSM of 1.8%–5.2% in men with negative TRUS biopsies during the following 10–20 years. Main limitation in all studies was limited follow-up.ConclusionOnly a few studies have investigated the risk of PCSM following initial negative biopsies and all studies included patients before the era of MRI of the prostate. However, the studies point to the fact that the risk of PCSM is low following initial negative TRUS biopsies, and that the level of prostate-specific antigen before biopsies holds prognostic information. This may be considered when advising patients about the need for further diagnostic evaluation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019134548.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the psychometric properties (and identify specific anomalies to be resolved) of urinary and sexual function scales of the Symptom Tracking and Reporting (STAR) instrument for use in clinical practice with individual men using Rasch analysis.DesignProspective cohort study.Setting9 UK surgery centres in secondary care.Participants403 men diagnosed with prostate cancer and completed at least one questionnaire immediately before and at 1 or 3 months after radical prostatectomy.Primary and secondary outcomesSTAR instrument before surgery and 1 and 3 months afterwards.ResultsNeither scale fitted the Rasch model (both scales p2, an inspection of item characteristic curves). Both scales showed items that were unstable over time (differential item functioning (DIF) by time). Both scales (four pairs of items in each scale) showed local response dependency (residual correlations >0.2 above the average). Internal consistency was acceptable at the group level for both scales. Targeting was poor for both scales, indicating an inadequate match between the location of items and the distribution of the patients, suggesting that the underlying constructs that the scales purport to measure are not clear.ConclusionUsing Rasch analysis as a diagnostic tool, we identified that both the urinary and the sexual function scales have issues that need to be resolved before STAR can be used with confidence in clinical practice. The sexual function scale, in particular, is unlikely to provide precise estimates for the outcomes experienced by men after radical prostatectomy. These results demonstrate the need to evaluate the suitability of any patient-reported outcome measure before implementation in routine clinical practice, preferably using modern psychometric methods.

IntroductionMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has improved the triage of men with suspected prostate cancer, through precision prebiopsy identification of clinically significant disease. While multiple important characteristics, including tumour grade and size have been shown to affect conspicuity on mpMRI, tumour location and association with mpMRI visibility is an underexplored facet of this field. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to collate the extant evidence comparing MRI performance between different locations within the prostate in men with existing or suspected prostate cancer. This review will help clarify mechanisms that underpin whether a tumour is visible, and the prognostic implications of our findings.Methods and analysisThe databases MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane will be systematically searched for relevant studies. Eligible studies will be full-text English-language articles that examine the effect of zonal location on mpMRI conspicuity. Two reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. A third reviewer will be involved if consensus is not achieved. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will inform the methodology and reporting of the review. Study bias will be assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A thematic approach will be used to synthesise key location-based factors associated with mpMRI conspicuity. A meta-analysis will be conducted to form a pooled value of the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI at different tumour locations.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as it is a protocol for a systematic review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021228087.

ObjectivesActive surveillance (AS) enables men with low risk, localised prostate cancer (PCa) to avoid radical treatment unless progression occurs; lack of reliable AS protocols to determine progression leaves uncertainties for men and clinicians. This study investigated men’s strategies for coping with the uncertainties of active monitoring (AM, a surveillance strategy within the Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment, ProtecT trial) over the longer term and implications for optimising supportive care.DesignLongitudinal serial in-depth qualitative interviews every 2–3 years for a median 7 (range 6–14) years following diagnosis.SettingFour centres within the UK Protect trial.ParticipantsPurposive sample of 20 men with localised PCa: median age at diagnosis 64 years (range 52–68); 15 (75%) had low-risk PCa; 12 randomly allocated to, 8 choosing AM. Eleven men continued with AM throughout the study period (median 7 years). Nine received radical treatment after a median 4 years (range 0.8–13.8 years).InterventionAM: 3-monthly serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-level assessment (year 1), 6–12 monthly thereafter; increase in PSA ≥50% during previous 12 months or patient/clinician concern triggered review.Main outcomesThematic analysis of 73 interviews identified strategies to accommodate uncertainty and anxiety of living with untreated cancer; implications for patient care.ResultsMen sought clarity, control or reassurance, with contextual factors mediating individual responses. Trust in the clinical team was critical for men in balancing anxiety and facilitating successful management change/continued monitoring. Only men from ProtecT were included; men outside ProtecT may have different experiences.ConclusionMen looked to clinicians for clarity, control and reassurance. Where provided, men felt comfortable continuing AM or having radical treatments when indicated. Clinicians build patient trust by clearly describing uncertainties, allowing patients control wherever possible and being aware of how context influences individual responses. Insights indicate need for supportive services to build trust and patient engagement over the long term.Trial registration numberISRCTN20141297; Pre-results.

IntroductionThe oligometastatic (OM) disease hypothesis of an intermediate metastatic state with limited distant disease deposits amenable for curative therapies remains debatable. Over a third of prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy and postoperative radiotherapy experience disease recurrence; these patients are considered incurable by current standards. Often the recurrence cannot be localised by conventional imaging (CT and bone scan). Combined anatomical imaging with CT and/or MR with positron emission tomography (PET) using a novel second-generation prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) probe, [18F]DCFPyL, is a promising imaging modality to unveil disease deposits in these patients. A new and earlier molecularly defined oligorecurrent (OR) state may be amenable to focal-targeted ablative curative-intent therapies, such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery, thereby significantly delaying or completely avoiding the need for palliative therapies in men with recurrent PCa after maximal local treatments.Methods and analysisThis ongoing single-institution phase II study will enrol up to 75 patients total, to include up to 37 patients with response-evaluable disease, who have rising prostate-specific antigen (range 0.4–3.0 ng/mL) following maximal local therapies with no evidence of disease on conventional imaging. These patients will undergo [18F]DCFPyL PET-MR/CT imaging to detect disease deposits, which will then be treated with SABR or surgery. The primary endpoints are performance of [18F]DCFPyL PET-MR/CT, and treatment response rates following SABR or surgery. Demographics and disease characteristics will be summarised and analysed descriptively. Response rates will be described with waterfall plots and proportions.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the institutional Research Ethics Board. All patients will provide written informed consent. [18F]DCFPyL has approval from Health Canada. The results of the study will be disseminated by the principal investigator. Patients will not be identifiable as individuals in any publication or presentation of this study.Trial registration numbersNCT03160794

IntroductionThere has been an interest in studying the efficacy of extreme hypofractionation in low and intermediate risk prostate cancer utilising the low alpha/beta ratio of prostate. Its role in high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer, however, is unknown. We hypothesise that a five-fraction schedule of extreme hypofractionation will be non-inferior to a moderately hypofractionated regimen over 5 weeks in efficacy and will have acceptable toxicity and quality of life while reducing the cost implications during treatment.Methods and analysisThis is an ongoing, non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised trial (NCT03561961) of two schedules for National Cancer Control Network high-risk and/or node-positive non-metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. The standard arm will be a schedule of 68 Gy/25# over 5 weeks while the test arm will be extremely hypofractionated radiotherapy with stereotactic body radiation therapy to 36.25 Gy/5# (7 to 10 days). The block randomisation will be stratified by nodal status (N0/N+), hormonal therapy (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone therapy/orchiectomy) and centre. All patients will receive daily image-guided radiotherapy.The primary end point is 4-year biochemical failure free survival (BFFS). The power calculations assume 4-year BFFS of 80% in the moderate hypofractionation arm. With a 5% one-sided significance and 80% power, a total of 434 patients will be randomised to both arms equally (217 in each arm). The secondary end points include overall survival, prostate cancer specific survival, acute and late toxicities, quality of life and out-of-pocket expenditure.DiscussionThe trial aims to establish a therapeutically efficacious and cost-efficient modality for high-risk and node-positive prostate cancer with an acceptable toxicity profile. Presently, this is the only trial evaluating and answering such a question in this cohort.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has been approved by IEC-III of Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai.Trial registration numberRegistered with CTRI/2018/05/014054 (http://ctri.nic.in) on 24 May 2018

ObjectiveTo evaluate the incidence and management of local and systemic complications afflicting patients with de novo metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) in Singapore.DesignRetrospective analysis of a large prospective Uro-oncology registry of mPCa.SettingThis study is carried out in a tertiary hospital in Singapore.ParticipantsWe reviewed our institution’s prospectively maintained database of 685 patients with mPCa over a 20-year period (1995–2014). Patients with non-mPCa or those progressed to metastatic disease after previous curative local treatments were excluded.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was to evaluate the systemic and local morbidity rates associated with mPCa. Local complication was defined as the need for palliative procedures to relieve urinary obstruction, worsening renal function or refractory haematuria, while systemic complication was related to radiographic evidence of skeletal-related pathological fractures. Secondary outcomes analysed were the management and overall survival patterns over 20 years.Results237 (34.6%) patients required local palliative treatments. 88 (12.8%) patients presented with acute urinary retention, 23 patients (9.7%) required repetitive local palliative treatments. On multivariate analyses, prostate-specific antigen >100 (p=0.02) and prostate volume >50 g (p=0.03) were independent prognostic factors for significant obstruction requiring palliative procedures. 118 (17.2%) patients developed skeletal fractures, with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance (ECOG) status (p=0.01) and high volume bone metastasis (pConclusionMorbidities and complications arising from mPCa are more common and debilitating than we thought, often requiring immediate palliative treatments, while many necessitate repeated interventions with progression.

Download PDFPDF\udUrology\udProtocol\udGenetic landscape of prostate cancer conspicuity on multiparametric MRI: a protocol for a systematic review and bioinformatic analysis\ud\ud Joseph M Norris1, Benjamin S Simpson1, Marina A Parry2, Clare Allen3, Rhys Ball4, Alex Freeman4, Daniel Kelly5, Alex Kirkham3, Veeru Kasivisvanathan1, Hayley C Whitaker1, Mark Emberton1\ud\udAuthor affiliations\udAbstract\ud\udIntroduction The introduction of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) has enabled enhanced risk stratification for men at risk of prostate cancer, through accurate prebiopsy identification of clinically significant disease. However, approximately 10%–20% of significant prostate cancer may be missed on mpMRI. It appears that the genomic basis of lesion visibility or invisibility on mpMRI may have key implications for prognosis and treatment. Here, we describe a protocol for the first systematic review and novel bioinformatic analysis of the genomic basis of prostate cancer conspicuity on mpMRI.\ud\udMethods and analysis A systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases will be conducted. Screening, data extraction, statistical analysis and reporting will be performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included papers will be full text articles, written between January 1980 and December 2019, comparing molecular characteristics of mpMRI-visible lesions and mpMRI-invisible lesions at the DNA, DNA-methylation, RNA or protein level. Study bias and quality will be assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa score. Additionally, we will conduct a novel bioinformatic analysis of supplementary material and publicly available data, to combine transcriptomic data and reveal common pathways highlighted across studies. To ensure methodological rigour, this protocol is written in accordance with the PRISMA Protocol 2015 checklist.\ud\udEthics and dissemination Ethical approval will not be required, as this is an academic review of published literature. Findings will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, and presentations at national and international conferences.

ObjectiveDietary factors and physical activity may alter prostate cancer progression. We explored the feasibility of lifestyle interventions following radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer.DesignPatients were recruited into a presurgical observational cohort; following radical prostatectomy, they were offered randomisation into a 2×3 factorial randomised controlled trial (RCT).SettingA single National Health Service trust in the South West of England, UK.ParticipantsThose with localised prostate cancer and listed for radical prostatectomy were invited to participate.RandomisationRandom allocation was performed by the Bristol Randomised Trial Collaboration via an online system.InterventionsMen were randomised into both a modified nutrition group (either increased vegetable and fruit, and reduced dairy milk; or lycopene supplementation; or control) and a physical activity group (brisk walking or control) for 6 months.BlindingOnly the trial statistician was blind to allocations.Primary outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were measures of feasibility: randomisation rates and intervention adherence at 6 months. Collected at trial baseline, three and six months, with daily adherence reported throughout. Our intended adherence rate was 75% or above, the threshold for acceptable adherence was 90%.Results108 men entered the presurgical cohort, and 81 were randomised into the postsurgical RCT (randomisation rate: 93.1%) and 75 completed the trial. Of 25 men in the nutrition intervention, 10 (40.0%; 95% CI 23.4% to 59.3%) adhered to the fruit and vegetable recommendations and 18 (72.0%; 95% CI 52.4% to 85.7%) to reduced dairy intake. Adherence to lycopene (n=28), was 78.6% (95% CI 60.5% to 89.8%), while 21/39 adhered to the walking intervention (53.8%; 95% CI 38.6% to 68.4%). Most men were followed up at 6 months (75/81; 92.6%). Three ‘possibly related’ adverse events were indigestion, abdominal bloating and knee pain.ConclusionsInterventions were deemed feasible, with high randomisation rates and generally good adherence. A definitive RCT is proposed.Trial registration numberISRCTN 99048944.

Introduction: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the main tool for early detection, risk stratification and monitoring of prostate cancer (PCa). However, there are controversies about the use of PSA as a population screening test because of the high potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment associated. The net benefit of screening is unclear and according to the available recommendations, it should be offered to well-informed men with an adequate health status and a life-expectancy of at least 10 years or to men at elevated risk of having PCa. In addition, the factors that influence test results are unclear, as is impact of false positive or negative results on patient health. Our objective is to assess the clinical and analytical factors associated with the presence of false positive and false negative results and the diagnostic/therapeutic process followed by these patients. Methods and analysis: A prospective observational cohort study will be carried out. We will include a cohort of patients with a positive PSA result (1.081 patients) and a sample of patients with negative results (572 patients); both will be followed for 2 years by reviewing medical records to assess the variables associated with these results, as well as characteristics of patient management after a positive PSA value. We will include those patients with a PSA determination from 2 hospitals in the Valencian Community. Patients who have been previously diagnosed with prostate cancer or who are being followed for previous high PSA values will be excluded. Discussion: The study will estimate the frequency of false positive and false negative PSA results in routine clinical practice, and allow us to quantify the potential harm caused. Study registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/): NCT03978299, June 7, 2019.

Conventional screening and diagnostic procedures in prostate complaints rely on PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) concentration which is not specific for prostate cancer and frequently leads to unnecessary invasive procedures in order to exclude malignant disease. It is estimated that approximately 50% of persons who underwent tissue biopsy did so based on false positive PSA value. Therefore a proper and timely differential diagnosis of malignant disease using non-invasive techniques remains one of the biggest challenges in medicine. Urine is the invaluable source of biological information contained in small molecules i.e. RNA that is easily accessible and detectable using molecular genetics techniques. We describe economical and fast method for relative expression analysis applicable to any target gene using urine as a sample. Efficient non-invasive method for identification of malignant or high risk cases prove useful in reduction of patient distress during the diagnostic procedure and significantly reduce healthcare costs.

Key Clinical Message Upper extremity lymphedema and cutaneous spread are atypical behavior of prostate disease and should be kept in the differential for selected patients. This presentation in these patients may be underdiagnosed and potentially an ominous sign. Our case adds to our continued learning of possible prostate malignancy behavior.

IntroductionSystemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and intensification with agents such as docetaxel, abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide has resulted in improved overall survival in men with de novo synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Novel local cytoreductive treatments and metastasis-directed therapy are now being evaluated. Such interventions may provide added survival benefit or delay the requirement for further systemic agents and associated toxicity but can confer additional harm. Understanding men’s preferences for treatment options in this disease state is crucial for patients, clinicians, carers and future healthcare service providers.MethodsUsing a prospective, multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE), we aim to determine the attributes associated with treatment that are most important to men with mHSPC. Furthermore, we plan to determine men’s preferences for, and trade-offs between, the attributes (survival and side effects) of different treatment options including systemic therapy, local cytoreductive approaches (external beam radiotherapy, cytoreductive radical prostatectomy or minimally invasive ablative therapy) and metastases-directed therapies (metastasectomy or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy). All men with newly diagnosed mHSPC within 4 months of commencing ADT and WHO performance status 0–2 are eligible. Men who have previously consented to a cytoreductive treatment or have developed castrate-resistant disease will be excluded. This study includes a qualitative analysis component, with patients (n=15) and healthcare professionals (n=5), to identify and define the key attributes associated with treatment options that would warrant trade-off evaluation in a DCE. The main phase component planned recruitment is 300 patients over 1 year, commencing in January 2021, with planned study completion in March 2022.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority East of England, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 20/EE/0194). Project information will be reported on the publicly available Imperial College London website and the Heath Economics Research Unit (HERU website including the HERU Blog). We will use the social media accounts of IP5-MATTER, Imperial Prostate London, HERU and the individual researchers to disseminate key findings following publication. Findings from the study will be presented at national/international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. Authorship policy will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.Trial registration numberNCT04590976.

Lower urinary tract diseases (LUTD) include different conditions that affect the urinary bladder, urethra and prostate. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of different related diseases, to characterize the population affected, and to determine risk factors in dogs. The clinical cases were diagnosed with LUTD through physical examination, and clinical laboratory and imaging studies. Male dogs had a greater predisposition to present a LUTD. Dogs from 3 months to 18 years with a median of 8 years were affected, and the most affected breeds were Poodle, Labrador, German shepherd, Schnauzer, Cocker Spaniel and Chihuahua. The LUTD presented with the following frequencies: bacterial urinary tract infection 34.02%; micturition disorders 22.68%; urolithiasis 20.61%; prostatic disease 14.43%; traumatic problems 8.24%. Sixty-seven per cent of the cases were specific diseases, such as uncomplicated and complicated bacterial urinary tract infections, urinary retention of neurologic origin and silica urolithiasis. RESUMO: Doenças do trato urinário inferior (DTUI) incluem várias condições clínicas que afetam a bexiga, próstata e uretra. O objetivo deste estudo foi determinar a frequência de diferentes doenças relacionadas, caracterizar a população afetada, e determinar os fatores de risco em cães. Os casos clínicos com DTUI foram diagnosticados através de exame físico, estudos laboratoriais e de imagem. Os cães machos apresentam uma maior predisposição para DTUI. Foram afectados cães com idades compreendidas entre os 3 meses a 18 anos, com uma mediana de oito anos, sendo as raças mais predispostas os Poodle, Labrador, Pastor Alemão, Schnauzer, Cocker Spaniel e Chihuahua. A etiologia DTUI apresentou as seguintes frequências: 34,02% foram originadas em infecção do trato urinário inferior; 22,68% em distúrbios miccionais; 20,61% em urolitíase; 14,43% em doença prostática; 8,24% em problemas traumáticos. Sessenta e sete por cento dos casos de DTUI estavam associados a doenças específicas, tais como infecções bacterianas do trato urinário não complicadas e complicadas, retenção urinária neurogénica e urolitíase por sílica.

IntroductionThe primary objective of the ReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening Study is to explore the uptake of an invitation to prostate cancer screening using MRI.Methods and analysisThe ReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening Study is a prospective single-centre feasibility study. Eligible men aged 50–75 years with no prior prostate cancer diagnosis or treatment will be identified through general practitioner practices and randomly selected for invitation. Those invited will be offered an MRI scan and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test. The screening MRI scan consists of T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and research-specific sequences, without the use of intravenous contrast agents. Men who screen positive on either MRI or PSA density will be recommended to have standard of care (National Health Service) tests for prostate cancer assessment, which includes multiparametric MRI. The study will assess the acceptability of an MRI-based prostate screening assessment and the prevalence of cancer detected in MRI-screened men. Summary statistics will be used to explore baseline characteristics in relation to acceptance rates and prevalence of cancer.Ethics and disseminationReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening is a single-site screening study to assess the feasibility of MRI as a screening tool for prostate cancer. Ethical approval was granted by London–Stanmore Research Ethics Committee Heath Research Authority (reference 19/LO/1129). Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals after completion of data analysis and used to inform the design of a multicentre screening study in the UK.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04063566).

IntroductionLimited data from controlled clinical trials are available for men who experience biochemical recurrence after definitive therapy for prostate cancer. In the absence of overt metastases, patients with non-metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (nmCSPC) often receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). There is no standard-of-care consensus on optimal ADT timing, although most men are treated prior to metastases, especially those with high-risk features (Gleason score 8–10 or prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) Methods and analysisEMBARK is a randomised, phase 3 study of high-risk patients with nmCSPC, a PSADT of ≤9 months and a screening PSA of ≥2 ng/mL above the nadir after radiotherapy (RT) or ≥1 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy (RP) with or without postoperative RT. Men (n=1050) are randomised 1:1:1 to enzalutamide 160 mg/day plus LHRHa or placebo plus LHRHa (double-blind arms) or enzalutamide monotherapy (open-label arm). Treatment is suspended at week 37 if PSA concentrations are Ethics and disseminationThe study is conducted under the guiding principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be disseminated at research conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT02319837.

Objective: To investigate the knowledge and prevalence of use of saw palmetto and other herbal products among men attending the urology outpatient clinic at San Fernando General Hospital. Subjects and methods: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study carried out between February and May 2015. A structured, interviewer administered questionnaire was used to collect data from randomly selected men with prostate cancer or benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and who were part of our outpatient clinics. This questionnaire contained sections on sociodemographic details as well as knowledge and attitudes towards herbal supplements with emphasis on saw palmetto. Data were compiled in Microsoft Excel and analysed using SPSS version 20. Results: Two hundred (200) men were interviewed. The mean age of the population was 69 years (Std. Dev. = 8.06) and most were from the south (56.5%) or central (19%) regions of Trinidad. 52% had BPH and 34.5% had prostate cancer. Overall, 85 men (42.5%) indicated use of herbal supplements of whom 53 (62.3%) used saw palmetto either alone or in combination with other products. Among men who had heard of saw palmetto or used it, 25% believed it may be used to reduce the risk of or treat prostate cancer. Thirty-six percent (36%) were of the opinion that saw palmetto is effective in treating the symptoms of an enlarged prostate. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the use of herbal products is common among men with prostate disease in Trinidad and Tobago and that saw palmetto is the most common product used. It also highlights the prevalence of unsubstantiated beliefs as well as the uncertainty about the efficacy of saw palmetto. African Journal of Urology (2017) 23, 249–252

IntroductionProstate cancer is a leading cause of cancer death among men in the Western world. Early detection of prostate cancer has been shown to decrease mortality, but has limitations with low specificity leading to unnecessary biopsies and overdiagnosis of low-risk cancers. The STHLM3 trial has paved way for improved specificity in early detection of prostate cancer using the blood-based STHLM3 test for identifying men at increased risk of harbouring significant prostate cancer. Targeted prostate biopsies based on MRI images have shown non-inferior sensitivity to detect significant prostate cancer and decrease the number of biopsies and non-significant cancers among men referred for prostate biopsy in clinical practice. The strategy of the STHLM3-MRI project is to study an improved diagnostic pathway including an improved blood-based test for identification of men with increased risk of prostate cancer and use of MRI to select men for diagnostic workup with targeted prostate biopsies.MethodsThis study compares prostate cancer detection using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and systematic biopsies to the improved pathway for prostate cancer detection using the STHLM3 test and targeted biopsies in a screening context. The study will recruit 10 000 participants during 1 June 2018 to 1 June 2020 combining a paired and randomised design. Participants are grouped by PSA and Stockholm3 test level. Men with Stockholm3 ≥11% or PSA ≥3 ng/mL are randomised to systematic or MRI-targeted biopsies. This protocol follows SPIRIT guidelines. Endpoints include the number of detected prostate cancers, number of performed biopsy procedures and number of performed MRIs. Additional aims include to assess the health economic consequences and development of automated image-analysis.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the regional ethical review board in Stockholm (2017-1280/31). The study findings will be published in peer-review journals. Findings will also be disseminated by conference/departmental presentations and by media.Trial registration numberNCT03377881; Pre-results.

ObjectiveTo describe the lived experience of a possible prostate cancer overdiagnosis in men who resisted recommended treatment.DesignQualitative interview studySettingAustraliaParticipants11 men (aged 59–78 years) who resisted recommended prostate cancer treatment because of concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment.OutcomesReported experience of screening, diagnosis and treatment decision making, and its impact on psychosocial well-being, life and personal circumstances.ResultsMen’s accounts revealed profound consequences of both prostate cancer diagnosis and resisting medical advice for treatment, with effects on their psychological well-being, family, employment circumstances, identity and life choices. Some of these men were tested for prostate-specific antigen without their knowledge or informed consent. The men felt uninformed about their management options and unsupported through treatment decision making. This often led them to develop a sense of disillusionment and distrust towards the medical profession and conventional medicine. The findings show how some men who were told they would soon die without treatment (a prognosis which ultimately did not eventuate) reconciled issues of overdiagnosis and potential overtreatment with their own diagnosis and situation over the ensuing 1 to 20+ years.ConclusionsMen who choose not to have recommended treatment for prostate cancer may avoid treatment-associated harms like incontinence and impotence, however our findings showed that the impact of the diagnosis itself is immense and far-reaching. A high priority for improving clinical practice is to ensure men are adequately informed of these potential consequences before screening is considered.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:Ejaculation frequency, including sexual intercourse, nocturnal emissions, and masturbation, affect the development of prostate disease, such as benign prostatic hyperpla...

ObjectiveGiven a man’s current prostate- specific antigen (PSA) level, age and family history of prostate cancer, what are the benefits (decreased risk of higher Gleason score [GS] cancer at diagnosis) and harms (increased risk of false-positive biopsy recommendation) of waiting 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5–8 years until the next PSA test?DesignProspective cohort.SettingAll PSA tested men in Stockholm, Sweden, between 2003 and 2015.ParticipantsMen aged 50–74 years with at least two PSA tests between 2003 and 2015 (n=174 636).Main outcome measuresLog-binomial regression to calculate the risk ratio (RR) of GS ≥7 and GS 6 versus benign outcome at prostate biopsy and 12-year cumulative probability of experiencing a false-positive biopsy by testing interval, age, PSA level and first-degree family history.ResultsMen with PSA ≤1 ng/mL had low risk of GS ≥7 prostate cancer irrespective of testing interval; 3 at the next testing occasion, and of the 663 men biopsied after the next PSA test only 32 (5%) had GS ≥7 cancer. Men with PSA >1 ng/mL had increased risk of being diagnosed with GS ≥7 prostate cancer when screened with longer than annual intervals (RRs ranged from 1.4 to 3.2 depending on PSA level and testing interval). The results were consistent across age groups and family history status. This benefit needs to be balanced against the increased risk for false-positive biopsy recommendation with shorter testing intervals (twofold for annual vs biennial and threefold for annual vs triennial).ConclusionsMen aged 50–74 years with PSA ≤1 ng/mL can wait 3–4 years before having a new PSA test. For men with PSA >1 ng/mL, we observed an increased risk of being diagnosed with GS ≥7 prostate cancer with longer than annual testing intervals. This benefit needs to be balanced against the markedly increased risks for false-positive biopsy recommendations with shorter testing intervals recommendations.

Introduction: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is the main tool for early detection, risk stratification and monitoring of prostate cancer (PCa). However, there are controversies about the use ofPSAas a population screening test because of the high potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment associated. The net benefit of screening is unclear and according to the available recommendations, it should be offered to well-informedmen with an adequate health status and a life-expectancy of at least 10 years or tomen at elevated risk of having PCa. In addition, the factors that influence test results are unclear, as is impact of false positive or negative results on patient health. Our objective is to assess the clinical and analytical factors associated with the presence of false positive and false negative results and the diagnostic/therapeutic process followed by these patients. Methods and analysis: A prospective observational cohort study will be carried out. We will include a cohort of patients with a positive PSA result (1.081 patients) and a sample of patients with negative results (572 patients); both will be followed for 2 years by reviewingmedical records to assess the variables associated with these results, as well as characteristics of patient management after a positive PSA value. We will include those patients with a PSA determination from2 hospitals in the Valencian Community. Patients who have been previously diagnosed with prostate cancer or who are being followed for previous high PSA values will be excluded. Discussion: The study will estimate the frequency of false positive and false negative PSA results in routine clinical practice, and allow us to quantify the potential harm caused. Study registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/): NCT03978299, June 7, 2019.