Search

Background. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is worldwide probably the most common procedure to treat localized prostate cancer (PC). Due to a more widespread use of Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) testing, patients operated today are often younger and have organ confined disease justifying a more preservative surgery. At the same time, surgical technique has improved resulting in lower risk of permanent side-effects. This paper aims to give an overview of results from modern surgery regarding cancer control and side-effects. A brief overview of the history is given. Material and Methods. A literature research identified recently published papers focusing on outcome and side-effects after RP. Results. One large randomized study (SPCG-4) compared RP and watchful waiting (WW). The study showed that RP was superior to WW in preventing local progression (RR 0.36), distant metastasis (RR 0.65) and death from PC (RR 0.65). Observational studies also show a better outcome for men treated with RP compared to WW. Peri-operative mortality after RP is low in most material around 0.1%. The risk of stricture of the vesico-urethral anastomosis has decreased with improved technique from historically 10-20% to a low incidence of around 2-9% today. Also the risk of incontinence has declined with improved technique. However, while the rates of severe incontinence is usually very low, as many as 30% still report light incontinence after long-term follow-up. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is still a frequent side-effect after RP. This risk is dependent on age, pre-operative sexual function, surgical technique and other risk factors for ED such as smoking, diabetes, etc. In selected subgroups the risk of ED is low. Inguinal hernia is a more recently described complication after open retropubic RP with a post-operative incidence of 15-20% within three years of surgery. Conclusion. RP is an effective method to achieve cancer control in selected patients. With modern technique it is a safe procedure with a low risk of permanent side-effects except for ED. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:The introduction of adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery for early breast cancer (BC) and its integration into routine clinical practice has consistently improved clinical outcomes. Since the addition of other agents to the contemporary standard of care containing an anthracycline, cyclophosphamide and a taxane has not lead to further prolongation of survival, subsequent efforts concentrated on escalating the administered doses and reducing the time interval between chemotherapy cycles. These strategies have been extensively evaluated in randomized trials and dose dense chemotherapy is now recommended by clinical practice guidelines. Method:Eligible trials were identified by searching the EMBASE, Pubmed, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases, as well as conference papers. The findings, shortcomings and impact of these studies are presented and critically discussed. Results:Although a large number of randomized trials has established the value of adjuvant chemotherapy, important questions remain unanswered. Ongoing research focuses on omitting treatment in good risk patients, identifying patients most likely to benefit from a dose dense approach and on administering personalized doses such as in tailored dose chemotherapy. Conclusions:Adjuvant chemotherapy for early BC is an evolving art. Further optimizations could potentially improve outcomes for a patient subset and spare others from unnecessary treatment-related toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]