Search

Background and Objective: The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines provide recommendations for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). This paper aims to present a summary of the 2024 version of the EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised PCa., Methods: The panel performed a literature review of all new data published in English, covering the time frame between May 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated, and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence., Key Findings and Limitations: A risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is considered, a combination of targeted and regional biopsies should be performed. Prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography imaging is the most sensitive technique for identifying metastatic spread. Active surveillance is the appropriate management for men with low-risk PCa, as well as for selected favourable intermediate-risk patients with International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A recommendation to consider hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term intensified hormonal treatment., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management., Patient Summary: This article is the summary of the guidelines for "curable" prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is "found" through a multistep risk-based screening process. The objective is to find as many men as possible with a curable cancer. Prostate cancer is curable if it resides in the prostate; it is then classified into low-, intermediary-, and high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer. These risk classes are the basis of the treatments. Low-risk prostate cancer is treated with "active surveillance", a treatment with excellent prognosis. For low-intermediary-risk active surveillance should also be discussed as an option. In other cases, active treatments, surgery, or radiation treatment should be discussed along with the potential side effects to allow shared decision-making., (Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) have been updated. Here we provide a summary of the 2024 guidelines., Methods: The panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2020 and 2023. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence., Key Findings and Limitations: Risk stratification for relapsing PCa after primary therapy may guide salvage therapy decisions. New treatment options, such as androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs), ARTA + chemotherapy combinations, PARP inhibitors and their combinations, and prostate-specific membrane antigen-based therapy have become available for men with metastatic PCa., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: Evidence for relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant PCa is evolving rapidly. These guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management. The full version is available online (http://uroweb.org/guideline/ prostate-cancer/)., Patient Summary: This article summarises the 2024 guidelines for the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence and guide doctors in discussing treatment decisions with their patients. The guidelines are updated every year., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) plays an important role in the treatment of a subgroup of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients., Objective: We aimed to evaluate morbidity associated with this procedure and identify potential predictors thereof to aid patient selection for this procedure and potentially improve patient outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: Data from 736 mRCC patients undergoing CN at 14 institutions were retrospectively recorded in the Registry for Metastatic RCC (REMARCC)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors for intraoperative, any-grade (AGCs), low-grade, and high-grade (HGCs) postoperative complications (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) as well as 30-d readmission rates., Results and Limitations: Intraoperative complications were observed in 69 patients (10.9%). Thrombectomy (odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.75, p = 0.009) and adjacent organ removal (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.38-5.30) were significant predictors of intraoperative complications at multivariable analysis. Two hundred seventeen patients (29.5%) encountered AGCs, while 45 (6.1%) encountered an HGC, of whom 10 (1.4%) died. Twenty-four (3.3%) patients had multiple postoperative complications. Estimated blood loss (EBL; OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08-2.05, p = 0.01) was a significant predictor of AGCs at multivariable analysis. CN case load (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.59, p = 0.009) and EBL (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.20-7.15, p = 0.02) were significant predictors solely for HGCs at multivariable analysis. Forty-one patients (11.5%) were readmitted within 30 d of surgery. No significant predictors were identified. Results were confirmed in a subanalysis focusing solely on patients treated in the contemporary targeted therapy era., Conclusions: Morbidity associated with CN is not negligible. Predictors of high-grade postoperative morbidity are predominantly indicators of complex surgery. EBL is a strong predictor of postoperative complications. CN case load correlates with lower high-grade morbidity and highlights the benefit of centralization of complex surgery. However, risks and benefits should be balanced when considering CN in mRCC patients., Patient Summary: We studied patients with metastatic renal cancer to evaluate the outcomes associated with the surgical removal of the primary kidney tumor. We found that this procedure is often complex and adverse events are not uncommon. High intraoperative blood loss and a small number of cases performed at the treating center are associated with a higher rate of postoperative complications., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Context: To date, established risk factors for prostate cancer (PCa) are limited to age, race, family history, and certain genetic polymorphisms. Despite great research efforts, available evidence on potentially modifiable risk factors is conflicting. Moreover, most studies on PCa risk factors did not consider the impact of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing on PCa diagnosis., Objective: To provide a detailed overview of the latest evidence on the role of metabolic diseases, drugs, and dietary factors for risk of PCa incidence, recurrence, and survival in men exposed to PSA testing., Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review of the English-language literature was performed using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses recommendations. Randomized, case-control, or cohort studies published during the periods 2008-2017 (on drugs and metabolic diseases) and 2003-2017 (on dietary factors), with extensive follow-up (≥8-10yr for studies on PCa risk; ≥2-5yr for studies on PCa recurrence, progression, and survival, depending on the review subtopic) and adjusting of the analyses, beyond established risk factors, for either rate of PSA testing (for risk analyses) or PCa stage and primary treatment (for survival analyses), were eligible for inclusion., Evidence Synthesis: Overall, 39 reports from 22 observational studies were included. Studies were heterogeneous regarding definitions of exposure or outcomes, length of follow-up, risk of bias, and confounding. For some risk factors, evidence was insufficient to assess potential effects, while for others there was no evidence of an effect. For selected risk factors, namely metformin, aspirin and statin use, diabetes, obesity, and specific dietary intakes, there was low-quality evidence of modest effects on PCa risk., Conclusions: Current evidence from long-term observational studies evaluating the effect of drugs, metabolic diseases, and dietary factors for PCa risk considering the impact of PSA testing is still not conclusive. Future research is needed to confirm the associations suggested by our review, exploring their potential biological explanations and selecting those risk factors most likely to trigger effective public health interventions., Patient Summary: We reviewed the available studies published in the recent literature on the potential role of drugs, metabolic diseases, and food and dietary factors for the risk of prostate cancer, considering the impact of prostate-specific antigen testing on prostate cancer diagnosis. We found that for some factors data are currently insufficient to make definitive conclusions, while for others available studies seem to indicate an effect on the risk of prostate cancer., (Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: While no consensus on the optimal salvage treatment exists, only 3% of these patients will get salvage radical prostatectomies due to the assumed technical challenges of this procedure., Objectives: Our goal is to analyze the perioperative, oncologic and functional outcomes of patients undergoing salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) after primary treatment failure., Materials and Methods: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed from a combined database of more than 14,800 patients who had undergone RARP. We identified 96 patients who underwent sRARP after RT or ablative techniques. Primary cancer characteristics, surgical data, pathology results, perioperative complications, oncologic and functional outcomes were analyzed., Results: Sixty-eight patients (70.8%) received some source of RT as a primary treatment. The remaining 28 patients: 18 (18.75%) received cryotherapy, seven (7.92%) HIFU, one electroporation, one microwave and one Tookad. complication was seen in 25 (26%) patients (21 minor and 4 major complications). Anastomotic leak was the most common complication, found in 14 (14.6%) of the cases. No rectal injuries occurred. Fourteen (15%) patients had a biochemical failure after a median follow-up of 14 (IQR 5-24) months. Fifty-five (57.3%) of them self-reported to be pad-free at 12 months. Seventeen (55%) of 31 pre-operative potent patients (SHIM score > 21), were potent with or without the use of PDE5i at 12 months., Conclusions: sRARP is a feasible alternative for PCa recurrence. Technically the procedure is challenging and should be performed by experienced PCa surgeons. Major complications are uncommon. Continence and potency recovery is possible, but at lower rates than for non-salvage patients.

Active surveillance (AS) as a therapeutic option is already integrated as a primary treatment strategy in low risk localized prostate cancer (PCa). There is a recent interest for the search of therapeutic interventions that result in a delay in the progression of such indolent cancers. The evaluation of the possible implication of 5 ARI drugs in the reduction of the risk of progression of PCa was enacted by the results of the clinical trials PCPT (Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial) and REDUCE (Reduction by Dutasteride of Prostate Cancer Events study). The results of the REDEEM clinical trial (Reduction by Dutasteride of clinical progression events in expectant management trial) revealed a delay in PCa progression favoring Dutasteride in comparison with placebo, being advanced age and PSA Density independent predictive factors for pathologic progression. Evidences regarding the influence of 5 ARIs in the evolution of AS patients come from few studies with limited follow up. Thus, the conclusions probably are far from being consiidered as definitive.