-
American Journal of Men's Health 2022This meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with large volume. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (until March 2022) were used to search related randomized controlled trials. A total of 11 studies including 1,258 patients were involved. HoLEP could significantly decrease the length of hospital stay and accelerate recovery. In subanalysis, HoLEP had better perioperative outcomes than bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP) and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate (BPEP). The improvement in operative time and enucleation time was better in thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) than HoLEP. In the follow-up period, the HoLEP decreased post-void residual urine (PVR) in short-term intervals and improved patients' maximum flow rate (Qmax) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in mid- and long-term intervals. In subanalysis, HoLEP presented significant improvements in Qmax, PSA, and quality of life (QoL) than B-TURP, and HoLEP could also improve Qmax than ThuLEP after 6 months of surgery. The HoLEP reduced the risk of postoperative bleeding compared with other surgeries in safety. In our study, we confirmed the advantages of HoLEP in treating BPH when the prostate size was larger than 80 mL, which indicated that HoLEP could be the best choice for treatment of large volume of prostate.
Topics: Humans; Lasers, Solid-State; Male; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality of Life; Transurethral Resection of Prostate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35864746
DOI: 10.1177/15579883221113203 -
European Urology Jan 2022Focal therapy is a promising, minimally invasive strategy to selectively treat localized prostate cancer. A previous systematic review indicated that there is growing... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Focal therapy is a promising, minimally invasive strategy to selectively treat localized prostate cancer. A previous systematic review indicated that there is growing evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but that oncological effectiveness was yet to be defined.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness of focal therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer in terms of functional and oncological outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies between October 2015 and December 31, 2020. In addition, the research stages were acquired according to the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study (IDEAL) recommendations. Ongoing studies were identified through clinical trial registries.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Seventy-two studies were identified exploring eight different sources of energy to deliver focal therapy in 5827 patients. Twenty-seven studies reported on high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), nine studies on irreversible electroporation, 11 on cryoablation, eight on focal laser ablation and focal brachytherapy, seven on photodynamic therapy (PDT), two on radiofrequency ablation, and one on prostatic artery embolization. The majority of studies were prospective development stage 2a studies (n = 357). PDT and HIFU, both in stage 3, showed promising results. Overall, HIFU studies reported a median of 95% pad-free patients and a median of 85% patients with no clinically significant cancer (CSC) in the treated area. For PDT, no changes in continence were reported and a median of 90% of patients were without CSC. Both treatments were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS
Over the past 5 yr, focal therapy has been studied for eight different energy sources, mostly in single-arm stage 2 studies. Although a first randomized controlled trial in focal therapy has been performed, more high-quality evaluations are needed, preferably via multicenter randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up and predefined assessment of oncological and functional outcomes and health-related quality-of-life measures.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Focal treatment (FT) of prostate cancer has potential, considering that it has less impact on continence and potency than radical treatment. Our systematic review indicates that despite the method being studied extensively over the past half decade, the majority of studies remain in an early research stage. The techniques high-intensity focused ultrasound and photodynamic therapy have shown most progression toward advanced research stages and show favorable results. However, more high-quality evidence is required before FT can become available as a standard treatment.
Topics: Embolization, Therapeutic; Humans; Male; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Prospective Studies; Prostate; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Prostatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34489140
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.08.005 -
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Jul 2023Metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCPRC) remains an aggressive form of prostate cancer that no longer responds to traditional hormonal treatment alone.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCPRC) remains an aggressive form of prostate cancer that no longer responds to traditional hormonal treatment alone. Despite the advent of novel anti-androgen medications, many patients continue to progress, and as a result, there is a growing need for additional treatment options.
AREAS COVERED
Lutetium-177 (Lu) - PSMA-617 has become one of the new frontline treatment options for refractory metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer after the failure of novel anti-androgen therapy and chemotherapy. Lu-177 has been used in real-world prospective trials and is now becoming utilized in newer phase III clinical trials. Here, we present a comprehensive overview of the current literature, covering retrospective studies, prospective studies, and clinical trials that established Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 (Lu-PSMA-617) for the treatment of mCRPC.
EXPERT OPINION
Lu - PSMA-617 has been approved for treatment of mCRPC based on positive phase III studies. While this treatment is tolerable and effective, biomarkers are necessary to determine which patients will benefit. In the future, radioligand treatments will likely be utilized in earlier lines of therapy and potentially in combination with other prostate cancer treatments.
Topics: Male; Humans; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Retrospective Studies; Radioisotopes; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37194261
DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2023.2213892 -
World Journal of Urology Feb 2023Recurrent urinary retention due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), requiring permanent catheterization, represents one of the most challenging issues geriatric... (Review)
Review
Rezūm water vapor therapy for the treatment of patients with urinary retention and permanent catheter dependence secondary to benign prostate hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature.
PURPOSE
Recurrent urinary retention due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), requiring permanent catheterization, represents one of the most challenging issues geriatric patients can face. Rezūm, as a minimal invasive treatment for BPH, takes the advantage of sterile water vapor injections directly into the prostate. The purpose of this Systematic Review is to report the safety and the efficacy of Rezūm regarding urinary retention relief and permanent catheter withdrawal.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases were meticulously screened using the keywords "Rezum", "retention" and "permanent catheter". Only human studies and articles in English were included. Rezūm should be the only intervention employed in patients. Patients of included studies should not have been submitted to any prior interventions, such as transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) for the relief of their symptoms. Patients' baseline characteristics along with intraoperative and postoperative parameters were collected and analysed. Catheter relief was the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Five studies fulfilled all the criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Four studies were retrospective and one was prospective. All studies were non-comparative. The success rate ranged from 70.3 to 100%, while no grade ≥ III Clavien-Dindo complications were reported in any of the studies.
CONCLUSION
Rezūm Water Vapor Therapy Treatment seems to be a feasible, safe and efficient minimally-invasive procedure for catheterized patients with urinary retention secondary to BPH, especially for frail ones with comorbidities who cannot undergo general anesthesia.
Topics: Male; Humans; Aged; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Prostate; Steam; Urinary Retention; Prospective Studies; Hyperplasia; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Catheters; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
PubMed: 36534152
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04258-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2018Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).
SEARCH METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture may result in little to no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may not reduce sexual dysfunction when compared with sham procedure (MD in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Scale -0.50, 95% CI -3.46 to 2.46, low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.2. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.3. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). This programme may not reduce anxiety or depression (low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction or quality of life.4. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.5. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). This treatment probably improves sexual dysfunction (MD in the IIEF Scale MD 3.34, 95% CI 2.68 to 4.00, one study, 60 participants, moderate QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.6. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. We found no information regarding sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.7. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of most of the other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of moderate quality evidence, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse event. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Adult; Chronic Disease; Chronic Pain; Circumcision, Male; Electromagnetic Radiation; Exercise; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Hyperthermia, Induced; Life Style; Male; Massage; Pelvic Pain; Prostatitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29757454
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012551.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017Prostate cancer is commonly diagnosed in men worldwide. Surgery, in the form of radical prostatectomy, is one of the main forms of treatment for men with localised... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prostate cancer is commonly diagnosed in men worldwide. Surgery, in the form of radical prostatectomy, is one of the main forms of treatment for men with localised prostate cancer. Prostatectomy has traditionally been performed as open surgery, typically via a retropubic approach. The advent of laparoscopic approaches, including robotic-assisted, provides a minimally invasive alternative to open radical prostatectomy (ORP).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy in men with localised prostate cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE) and abstract proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status, up until 9 June 2017. We also searched bibliographies of included studies and conference proceedings.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a direct comparison of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) to ORP, including pseudo-RCTs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data. The primary outcomes were prostate cancer-specific survival, urinary quality of life and sexual quality of life. Secondary outcomes were biochemical recurrence-free survival, overall survival, overall surgical complications, serious postoperative surgical complications, postoperative pain, hospital stay and blood transfusions. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and assessed the quality of the evidence according to GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two unique studies with 446 randomised participants with clinically localised prostate cancer. The mean age, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of the participants were 61.3 years, 49.78 mL, and 7.09 ng/mL, respectively. Primary outcomes We found no study that addressed the outcome of prostate cancer-specific survival. Based on data from one trial, RARP likely results in little to no difference in urinary quality of life (MD -1.30, 95% CI -4.65 to 2.05) and sexual quality of life (MD 3.90, 95% CI -1.84 to 9.64). We rated the quality of evidence as moderate for both quality of life outcomes, downgrading for study limitations. Secondary outcomes We found no study that addressed the outcomes of biochemical recurrence-free survival or overall survival.Based on one trial, RARP may result in little to no difference in overall surgical complications (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.04) or serious postoperative complications (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.32). We rated the quality of evidence as low for both surgical complications, downgrading for study limitations and imprecision.Based on two studies, LRP or RARP may result in a small, possibly unimportant improvement in postoperative pain at one day (MD -1.05, 95% CI -1.42 to -0.68 ) and up to one week (MD -0.78, 95% CI -1.40 to -0.17). We rated the quality of evidence for both time-points as low, downgrading for study limitations and imprecision. Based on one study, RARP likely results in little to no difference in postoperative pain at 12 weeks (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.34). We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, downgrading for study limitations.Based on one study, RARP likely reduces the length of hospital stay (MD -1.72, 95% CI -2.19 to -1.25). We rated the quality of evidence as moderate, downgrading for study limitations.Based on two study, LRP or RARP may reduce the frequency of blood transfusions (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.46). Assuming a baseline risk for a blood transfusion to be 8.9%, LRP or RARP would result in 68 fewer blood transfusions per 1000 men (95% CI 78 fewer to 48 fewer). We rated the quality of evidence as low, downgrading for study limitations and indirectness.We were unable to perform any of the prespecified secondary analyses based on the available evidence. All available outcome data were short-term and we were unable to account for surgeon volume or experience.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no high-quality evidence to inform the comparative effectiveness of LRP or RARP compared to ORP for oncological outcomes. Urinary and sexual quality of life-related outcomes appear similar.Overall and serious postoperative complication rates appear similar. The difference in postoperative pain may be minimal. Men undergoing LRP or RARP may have a shorter hospital stay and receive fewer blood transfusions. All available outcome data were short-term, and this study was unable to account for surgeon volume or experience.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Middle Aged; Organ Size; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Sexual Behavior; Urination
PubMed: 28895658
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009625.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2023The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the association between periodontal disease and prostate inflammation with a null hypothesis stating... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the association between periodontal disease and prostate inflammation with a null hypothesis stating that periodontal disease does not increase the incidence of prostate inflammation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of longitudinal observational cohort and case-control studies that evaluated the odds ratio or hazard ratio and confidence interval was undertaken based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations (2020). A total of four databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicated articles and applying the inclusion criteria, seven articles were selected for the qualitative and quantitative analyses.
RESULTS
Four observational cohort studies and three observational cohort case-control studies were included in the meta-analysis. The four observational cohort studies were combined using the random effects model to estimate a hazard ratio of 1.32 with a confidence interval of 95% between 0.87 and 1.77. The meta-analysis presented high heterogeneity (Q test = 56.1; value < 0.001; I = 94.9%). Moreover, the three observational case-control studies were combined using the random effects model to estimate an odds ratio of 1.62 with a confidence interval of 95% between 1.41 and 1.84. The meta-analysis presented high heterogeneity (Q test = 1.07; value = 0.782; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence of periodontal disease does not increase the risk of the incidence of prostate inflammation.
PubMed: 37763009
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12186070 -
European Urology Mar 2017Prostate biopsy (PB) represents the gold standard method to confirm the presence of cancer. In addition to traditional random or systematic approaches, a magnetic... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Prostate biopsy (PB) represents the gold standard method to confirm the presence of cancer. In addition to traditional random or systematic approaches, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided technique has been introduced recently.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review of complications after transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, transperineal, and MRI-guided PB.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic literature search of Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases up to October 2015, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Complications and mortality following random, systematic, and image-guided PBs were reviewed. Eighty-five references were included.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The most frequent complication after PB was minor and self-limiting bleeding (hematuria and hematospermia), regardless of the biopsy approach. Occurrence of rectal bleeding was comparable for traditional TRUS-guided and image-guided PBs. Almost 25% of patients experienced lower urinary tract symptoms, but only a few had urinary retention, with higher rates after a transperineal approach. Temporary erectile dysfunction was not negligible, with a return to baseline after 1-6 mo. The incidence of infective complications is increasing, with higher rates among men with medical comorbidities and older age. Transperineal and in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy may reduce the risk of severe infectious complications. Mortality after PB is uncommon, regardless of biopsy technique.
CONCLUSIONS
Complications after PB are frequent but often self-limiting. The incidence of hospitalization due to severe infections is continuously increasing. The patient's general health status, risk factors, and likelihood of antimicrobial resistance should be carefully appraised before scheduling a PB.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We reviewed the variety and incidence of complications after prostate biopsy. Even if frequent, complications seldom represent a problem for the patient. The most troublesome complications are infections. To minimize this risk, the patient's medical condition should be carefully evaluated before biopsy.
Topics: Biopsy; Endosonography; Erectile Dysfunction; Hematuria; Hemospermia; Humans; Image-Guided Biopsy; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Prostate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Recovery of Function; Rectal Diseases; Surgical Wound Infection; Urinary Retention
PubMed: 27543165
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.004 -
Nutrients Feb 2023We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the role of alcohol consumption with the prognosis of prostate cancer (PCa). Published reports were... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the role of alcohol consumption with the prognosis of prostate cancer (PCa). Published reports were gathered on 15 October 2022, from PUBMED/MEDLINE and EMBASE. We found 19 independent eligible studies on the association between consumption of alcoholic beverages and the risk of fatal PCa (n = 5), PCa mortality (n = 5) in healthy subjects, and PCa patients' survival (n = 7) or surrogates thereof (n = 2). We used random effects meta-analysis to obtain a summary risk estimate (SRE) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for incidence of fatal PCa and PCa mortality. The meta-analysis revealed no association between alcohol consumption and fatal prostate cancer incidence risk in healthy subjects with an indication for publication bias, but omitting the study that mainly increased the between-study heterogeneity, the SRE becomes significant (SRE 1.33, 95%CI 1.12-1.58), and the heterogeneity disappeared ( = 0%) with no indication of publication bias. No association of alcohol consumption was found with mortality risk in PCa patients (SRE 0.97, 95%CI 0.92-1.03) and PCa mortality risk in healthy subjects (SRE 1.03, 95%CI 0.82-1.30). In conclusion, this study suggests that there is some evidence of an association between high alcohol consumption and an increased risk of incidence of fatal prostate cancer in healthy subjects. Given the inconsistencies this result warrants further confirmation.
Topics: Male; Humans; Alcohol Drinking; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostate; Prognosis; Incidence
PubMed: 36839283
DOI: 10.3390/nu15040925 -
Reviews on Environmental Health Sep 2016Investigations about the association between prostate cancer and environmental and/or occupational pesticide exposure have evidenced a possible role of these chemical... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Investigations about the association between prostate cancer and environmental and/or occupational pesticide exposure have evidenced a possible role of these chemical substances on tumor etiology, related to their action as endocrine disruptors.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association between pesticide exposure and prostate cancer by conducting a systematic review of the scientific literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Articles published until August 18, 2015 were searched in the databases MEDLINE/Pubmed, Scielo, and Lilacs using the keywords "pesticides" and "prostate cancer". Only the analytical observational studies whose methodological quality met the criteria established by the New Castle-Ottawa scale were included in this review.
RESULTS
The review included 49 studies published between 1993 and 2015. All studies were in English and analyzed exposure to pesticides and/or agricultural activities. Most studies (32 articles) found a positive association between prostate cancer and pesticides or agricultural occupations, with estimates ranging from 1.01 to 14.10.
CONCLUSION
The evidence provided by the reviewed studies indicates a possible association between the development of prostate cancer and pesticide exposure and/or agricultural occupations.
Topics: Agriculture; Environmental Exposure; Humans; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Occupational Exposure; Pesticides; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 27244877
DOI: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0001