Search

Background For specific clinical indications, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) will induce disease prostate cancer (PC) regression, relieve symptoms and prolong survival; however, ADT has a well‐described range of side effects, which may have a detrimental effect on the patient's quality of life, necessitating additional interventions or changes in PC treatment. The risk‐benefit analysis for initiating ADT in PC patients throughout the PC disease continuum warrants review. Methods A 14‐member panel comprised of urologic and medical oncologists were chosen for an expert review panel, to provide guidance on a more judicious use of ADT in advanced PC patients. Panel members were chosen based upon their academic and community experience and expertise in the management of PC patients. Four academic members of the panel served as group leaders; the remaining eight panel members were from Large Urology Group Practice Association practices with proven experience in leading their advanced PC clinics. The panel members were assigned to four separate working groups, and were tasked with addressing the role of ADT in specific PC settings. Results This article describes the practical recommendations of an expert panel for the use of ADT throughout the PC disease continuum, as well as an algorithm summarizing the key recommendations. The target for this publication is all providers (urologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, or advanced practice providers) who evaluate and manage advanced PC patients, regardless of their practice setting. Conclusion The panel has provided recommendations for monitoring PC patients while on ADT, recognizing that PC patients will progress despite testosterone suppression and, therefore, early identification of conversion from castrate‐sensitive to castration resistance is critical. Also, the requirement to both identify and mitigate side effects of ADT as well as the importance of quality of life maintenance are essential to the optimization of patient care, especially as more combinatorial therapeutic strategies with ADT continue to emerge.

Assessing the unmet needs of cancer patients can help providers tailor health care services to patients’ specific needs [1]. This study examines whether the unmet informational and supportive care needs of the patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer vary by the patients’ age, sex, or individual treatment choices [1].

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:NGS allows a comprehensive analysis of the genomic profile of rectal microbiota and, most importantly, the identification of resistance genes to the standard antibacteri...

The risk stratification of prostate cancer and breast cancer tumours from patients relies on histopathology, selective genomic testing, or on other methods employing fixed formalin tissue samples. However, static biomarker measurements from bulk fixed-tissue samples provide limited accuracy and actionability. Here, we report the development of a live-primary-cell phenotypic-biomarker assay with single-cell resolution, and its validation with prostate cancer and breast cancer tissue samples for the prediction of post-surgical adverse pathology. The assay includes a collagen-I/fibronectin extracellular-matrix formulation, dynamic live-cell biomarkers, a microfluidic device, machine-vision analysis and machine-learning algorithms, and generates predictive scores of adverse pathology at the time of surgery. Predictive scores for the risk stratification of 59 prostate cancer patients and 47 breast cancer patients, with values for area under the curve in receiver-operating-characteristic curves surpassing 80%, support the validation of the assay and its potential clinical applicability for the risk stratification of cancer patients.

The lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa) has led to over-diagnosis and overtreatment with uncertain benefit. Therefore, biomarkers for early diagnosis that can distinguish aggressive from indolent tumors and that can detect metastatic or recurrent disease are needed. Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) are non-protein-coding RNA species. lncRNAs are dysregulated in many diseases including PCa and are emerging as major players in cancer development. lncRNAs have several features that make then suitable as both biomarkers and therapeutics, and lncRNAs regulate critical cancer hallmarks in prostate epithelial cells including proliferation and survival.The PubMed database was searched using the terms 'long noncoding RNA', 'biomarker' and 'prostate cancer'. Known lncRNAs implicated as biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets in PCa are reviewed.We comprehensively review several lncRNAs with potential as biomarkers for PCa. lncRNAs including PCA3, PCATs, SChLAP1, SPRY4-IT1 and TRPM2-AS are upregulated in PCa and are cancer specific; they are, therefore, attractive lead candidate biomarkers for clinical application. Several lncRNA therapeutics are currently being investigated by several companies for the treatment of various cancers including PCa. Small interfering RNAs, antisense oligonucleotides, ribozymes, deoxyribozymes and aptemers are few promising technologies for future lncRNA bases therapeutics.lncRNA expression is altered in cancer. Aberrant regulation promotes tumor formation, progression and metastasis. lncRNAs can use as tumor markers for PCa and may be attractive novel therapeutic targets for the diagnosis and treatment of PCa.

The promise of precision and personalized medicine is rooted in accurate, highly sensitive, and specific disease biomarkers. This is particularly true for cancer-a disease characterized by marked tumor heterogeneity and diverse molecular signatures. Although thousands of biomarkers have been described, only a very small number have been successfully translated into clinical use. Undoubtedly, there is need for rapid, quantitative, and more cost effective biomarkers for tumor diagnosis and prognosis, to allow for better risk stratification and aid clinicians in making personalized treatment decisions. This is particularly true for cancers where specific biomarkers are either not available (e.g., renal cell carcinoma) or where current biomarkers tend to classify individuals into broad risk categories unable to accurately assess individual tumor aggressiveness and adverse pathology potential (e.g., prostate cancer), thereby leading to problems of over-diagnosis and over-treatment of indolent cancer and under-treatment of aggressive cancer. This perspective highlights an emerging class of cancer biomarkers-live-single-cell phenotypic biomarkers, as compared to genomic biomarkers, and their potential application for cancer diagnosis, risk-stratification, and prognosis.

Objectives To evaluate the impact of a genomic classifier (GC) test for predicting metastasis risk after radical prostatectomy (RP) on urologists' decision-making about adjuvant treatment of patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Subjects and Methods Patient case history was extracted from the medical records of each of the 145 patients with pT3 disease or positive surgical margins (PSMs) after RP treated by six high-volume urologists, from five community practices. GC results were available for 122 (84%) of these patients. US board-certified urologists (n = 107) were invited to provide adjuvant treatment recommendations for 10 cases randomly drawn from the pool of patient case histories. For each case, the study participants were asked to make an adjuvant therapy recommendation without (clinical variables only) and with knowledge of the GC test results. Recommendations were made without knowledge of other participants' responses and the presentation of case histories was randomised to minimise recall bias. Results A total of 110 patient case histories were available for review by the study participants. The median patient age was 62 years, 71% of patients had pT3 disease and 63% had PSMs. The median (range) 5-year predicted probability of metastasis by the GC test for the cohort was 3.9 (1–33)% and the GC test classified 72% of patients as having low risk for metastasis. A total of 51 urologists consented to the study and provided 530 adjuvant treatment recommendations without, and 530 with knowledge of the GC test results. Study participants performed a mean of 130 RPs/year and 55% were from community-based practices. Without GC test result knowledge, observation was recommended for 57% (n = 303), adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) for 36% (n = 193) and other treatments for 7% (n = 34) of patients. Overall, 31% (95% CI: 27–35%) of treatment recommendations changed with knowledge of the GC test results. Of the ART recommendations without GC test result knowledge, 40% (n = 77) changed to observation (95% CI: 33–47%) with this knowledge. Of patients recommended for observation, 13% (n = 38 [95% CI: 9–17%]) were changed to ART with knowledge of the GC test result. Patients with low risk disease according to the GC test were recommended for observation 81% of the time (n = 276), while of those with high risk, 65% were recommended for treatment (n = 118; P < 0.001). Treatment intensity was strongly correlated with the GC-predicted probability of metastasis (P < 0.001) and the GC test was the dominant risk factor driving decisions in multivariable analysis (odds ratio 8.6, 95% CI: 5.3–14.3%; P < 0.001). Conclusions Knowledge of GC test results had a direct effect on treatment strategies after surgery. Recommendations for observation increased by 20% for patients assessed by the GC test to be at low risk of metastasis, whereas recommendations for treatment increased by 16% for patients at high risk of metastasis. These results suggest that the implementation of genomic testing in clinical practice may lead to significant changes in adjuvant therapy decision-making for high-risk prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer death in American men. Prostate cancer diagnosis and mortality differences between African American and Caucasian populations have been highlighted in the literature. Research has shown that African American males are at a biological predisposition for prostate cancer and that additional socioeconomic and physician-patient educational factors may contribute to the higher mortality rate among this group—over two times greater than that of Caucasian American males. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently concluded that there is insufficient evidence on the harms and benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening to recommend that anyone should receive the test. However, the American Urological Association (AUA) emphasizes that the value of early detection should not be overlooked and that shared decision making should be integral to screening decisions. Parameters that can be used concurrently with PSA measureme...

Current methods of suprapubic cystostomy (SPC) catheter insertion may be difficult for patients in poor health and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. These include a highly invasive open procedure, as well as the use of the percutaneous trocar punch methods, commonly associated with short-term SPC. We present the first human experience with the Transurethral Suprapubic endo-Cystostomy (T-SPeC(®)) device, a novel disposable device used for introducing a suprapubic catheter via a retrourethral (inside-to-out) approach similar to the Lowsley technique.Four men at St. Mary's General Hospital in Kitchener Ontario, Canada, received the T-SPeC device (model T7) under general anesthesia.Patients had no complications from catheterization using the T-SPeC T7 Surgical System. The mean surgical time of the four procedures was 9.7 minutes, with a range of 7.9 to 13.5 minutes, including instrument preparation and cystoscopy. All four procedures were highly accurate and rapid. There were no complications and minimal blood loss from the procedure.We found that the T-SPeC device allows for efficient and safe insertion of a suprapubic catheter in an outpatient setting and may be a useful addition to the urologic armamentarium. The T-SPeC Surgical System facilitates rapid and precise suprapubic catheter placement.

Advancement in surgical management of urolithiasis has revolved around improvements in technology. Urologists have been at the forefront on embracing new technology and passing on the benefits to the patients. Da Vinci® robotic system has contributed significantly in improving the outcomes of minimally invasive procedures especially those requiring complex resections and reconstruction. Endourological and percutaneous techniques have established superiority in management of urolithiasis and majority of the patients are ideal candidates for such procedures. However, in certain stone disease indications like simultaneous pyeloplasty-pyelolithotomy, robotic assisted procedure has established superiority, at least in the developed world. Other indications like complex pyelolithotomy and stone extraction with simultaneous partial nephrectomy are being continuously documented. Large, multi-institutional studies to evaluate the effective advantages of the robotic approach against well-established methodologies in the treatment of stone disease are required. However the wider availability of robotic system in areas where stone disease is endemic continues to be the biggest challenge.