-
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica = the... Feb 2018To evaluate the available evidence on the standard diagnosis and management of men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and providing the timely... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
To evaluate the available evidence on the standard diagnosis and management of men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and providing the timely update on new pharmacological treatments.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic literature search from from January 2000 until March 2017 was performed by combining the following MESH terms: castrate resistant prostate cancer, abiraterone, enzalutamide, 223radium, sipuleucel-T, docetaxel, cabazitaxel, resistance mechanisms, resistance to androgen deprivation, androgen receptor (AR) mutations, amplifications, splice variants, and AR alterations. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
In the few last years the introduction of new treatment modalities as abiraterone or enzalutamide have significantly change our prospective in mCRPC management increasing patients survival and quality of life. The standard imaging modalities to define the presence of regional or distant metastasis or the different resistant mechanisms to the available treatments are still an issue of debate, however several studies are ongoing to define the standard of care and to reduce treatments' resistance. Data from ongoing phase III trials are awaited to introduce in clinical new effective treatments that can be used in patients resistant to abiraterone/enzalutamide or more probably in a different phase of the disease.
CONCLUSIONS
Castration resistant prostate cancer is now the key issue in prostate cancer management and research. Our challenge in the near future will be to identify the right treatment or better the right combination and sequencing of treatments that should be used in patients with mCRPC or even with advanced prostate cancer.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Quality of Life
PubMed: 28707844
DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.17.02976-9 -
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica = the... Dec 2017The aim of our work was to evaluate the role of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in detection and management of prostate cancer (PC); specifically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The aim of our work was to evaluate the role of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in detection and management of prostate cancer (PC); specifically investigating the efficacy of mpMRI-based biopsy techniques in terms of diagnostic yield of significant prostate neoplasm and the improved management of patients who choose conservative treatments or active surveillance.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic and critical analysis through Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases was carried out in March 2016, following the PRISMA ("Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses") statement. The search was conducted using the following key words: "MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsy," "PIRADS," "prostate cancer," "magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)," "multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)," "systematic prostate biopsy (SB)," "targeted prostate biopsy (TPB)." English language articles were reviewed for inclusion ability.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Sixty-six studies were selected in order to evaluate the characteristics and limitations of traditional sample biopsy, the role of mpMRI in detection of PC, specifically the increased degree of diagnostic accuracy of targeted prostate biopsy compared to systematic biopsy (12 cores), and to transperineal saturation biopsies with trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) only. MpMRI can detect index lesions in approximately 90% of cases when compared to prostatectomy specimen. The diagnostic performance of biparametric MRI (T2w + DWI) is not inferior to mpMRI, offering valid options to diminish cost- and time-consumption. Since approximately 10% of significant lesions are still MRI-invisible, systematic cores biopsy seem to still be necessary. The analysis of the different techniques shows that in-bore MRI-guided biopsy and MRI/TRUS-fusion-guided biopsy are superior in detection of significant PC compared to visual estimation alone. MpMRI proved to be very effective in active surveillance, as it prevents underdetection of significant PC and it assesses low-risk disease accurately. In higher-risk disease, presurgical MRI may change the clinically-based surgical plan in up to a third of cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Targeted prostate biopsy, guided by mpMRI, is able to improve diagnostic accuracy and to reduce the detection of insignificant PC. Since the negative predictive value (NPV) of mpMRI is still imperfect, systematic cores biopsy should not be omitted for optimal staging of disease. A process of a progressive and periodic evolution in the detection and radiological classification of prostate lesions (such as PIRADS), is still needed in patients in active surveillance and in radical prostatectomy planning.
Topics: Humans; Image-Guided Biopsy; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Neoplasm Staging; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 28488844
DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.17.02819-3 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Dec 2023Extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches are two common modalities in single-port (SP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), but differences in safety and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Perioperative, function, and positive surgical margin in extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches are two common modalities in single-port (SP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), but differences in safety and efficacy between the two remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the perioperative, function, and positive surgical margin of extraperitoneal with transperitoneal approaches SP-RARP.
METHODS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, this study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42023409667). We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies published up to February 2023. Stata 15.1 software was used to analyze and calculate the risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD).
RESULTS
A total of five studies, including 833 participants, were included in this study. The SP-TPRP group is superior to the SP-EPRP group in intraoperative blood loss (WMD: - 43.92, 95% CI - 69.81, - 18.04; p = 0.001), the incidence of postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II and above complications (RR: 0.55, 95% CI - 0.31, 0.99; p = 0.04), and postoperative continence recovery (RR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.05, 1.45; p = 0.04). Conversely, the hospitalization stays (WMD: 7.88, 95% confidence interval: 0.65, 15.1; p = 0.03) for the SP-EPRP group was shorter than that of the SP-TPRP group. However, there was no significant difference in operation time, postoperative pain score, total incidence of postoperative complications, and positive surgical margin (PSM) rates between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates that both extraperitoneal and extraperitoneal SP-RARP approaches are safe and effective. SP-TPRP is superior to SP-EPRP in postoperative blood loss, the incidence of postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II and above complications, and postoperative continence recovery, but it is accompanied by longer hospital stays.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotics; Margins of Excision; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38087327
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03272-7 -
Chinese Medical Journal Dec 2017The optimal management strategy for prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. We performed a systemic review of current progress and controversies regarding the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The optimal management strategy for prostate cancer (PCa) remains controversial. We performed a systemic review of current progress and controversies regarding the diagnosis and treatment of PCa.
DATA SOURCES
We searched PubMed for recently published articles up to July 2017 using the following key words: "prostate cancer," "progress," "controversy," "immunotherapy," and "prevention."
STUDY SELECTION
Articles were obtained and reviewed to provide a systematic review of the current progress and controversies regarding PCa management.
RESULTS
The value of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening remains controversial, but PSA screening is recommended to facilitate the early diagnosis of PCa in high-risk groups. Prostate biopsy via the transrectal or perineal approach has both advantages and disadvantages. There was a significant correlation between testosterone levels and PCa prognosis. The current research is focused on the mechanisms responsible for PCa. Active surveillance has been proposed as a management strategy for low-risk, localized PCa, but there is an urgent need for further clinical studies to establish the criteria for recommending this approach. The main complications of radical resection for PCa are urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, though three-dimensional laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic techniques have obvious advantages over radical surgery. Radiotherapy is also a therapeutic option for PCa, while immunotherapies may alter the prostate tumor microenvironment. Ongoing studies aim to provide guidance on effective sequential and combination strategies. Prevention remains an important strategy for reducing PCa morbidity and mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of PCa are complex issues, worthy of intensive study. Further studies are needed to improve the management of PCa.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiotherapy
PubMed: 29237932
DOI: 10.4103/0366-6999.220317 -
Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging 2021Prostate-specific membrane antigen- (PSMA-) targeted agents labeled with fluorine-18 (F) have recently become available to evaluate patients with biochemical recurrent... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prostate-specific membrane antigen- (PSMA-) targeted agents labeled with fluorine-18 (F) have recently become available to evaluate patients with biochemical recurrent prostate cancer (BRPCa) by using positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) or positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis about the detection rate (DR) of F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI in BRPCa patients.
METHODS
A comprehensive computer literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published through 17 May 2021 was carried out using the following search algorithm: "PSMA" AND "1007". Only studies providing data on the DR of F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI in BRPCa were included. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled DR on a per scan basis.
RESULTS
Fifteen articles (853 patients) were selected and included in the systematic review, and ten were included in the quantitative analysis. Most of the studies reported a good DR of F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI in BRPCa including also patients with low prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSA) values. The DR of F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI was dependent on PSA serum values. The pooled DR was 81.3% (95% confidence interval: 74.6-88%) with statistical heterogeneity. A significant reporting bias (publication bias) was not detected.
CONCLUSIONS
F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI showed a good DR in BRPCa patients in line with other PSMA-targeted agents. The DR of F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT or PET/MRI is influenced by serum PSA values. These findings should be confirmed by prospective multicentric trials.
Topics: Gallium Radioisotopes; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Niacinamide; Oligopeptides; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography; Positron-Emission Tomography; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35002568
DOI: 10.1155/2021/3502389 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2024Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is a generally accepted method treating for aging-related late-onset hypogonadism (LOH). However, the efficacy and safety of TRT... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) is a generally accepted method treating for aging-related late-onset hypogonadism (LOH). However, the efficacy and safety of TRT remain controversial. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness and security of TRT treating for LOH.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TRT for LOH were searched in the databases of Pubmed, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane from 1990 to 2023 and an updated meta-analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
The results of 28 RCTs involving 3461 patients were included and scrutinized in this analysis. Among these, 11 RCTs were of long-term duration (≥12 months), while 18 RCTs were short-term studies (<12 months) comparing TRT with a placebo. TRT modalities comprised injection, oral administration, and transdermal administration. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) (Weighted Mean difference (WMD) 3.26; 95%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.654.88; P<0.0001) was obviously improved in the TRT group. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) (WMD 0.00; 95% CI -0.450.45; P=1.0), Prostate Volume (PV) (WMD 0.38; 95% CI -0.641.41; P=0.46), Maximum Flow Rate (Qmax) (WMD 1.86; 95% CI -0.984.69; P=0.20), Postvoid Residual Urine Volume (PVR) (WMD 3.20; 95% CI -5.8712.28; P=0.49) and Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) (WMD 0.08; 95% CI -0.000.17; P=0.06) were not significantly statistical between two groups.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis reveals that TRT could improve the IIEF score of hypogonadal men without detriment to the IPSS score, PV, Qmax, PVR and PSA regardless of the administration method or duration of treatment.The meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023413434).
Topics: Humans; Male; Erectile Dysfunction; Hypogonadism; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Testosterone; Aging
PubMed: 38344665
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1335146 -
Journal of Cancer Research and... Sep 2018Conflicting data have been reported regarding the association between perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) and clinical outcomes for prostate cancer patients. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Conflicting data have been reported regarding the association between perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) and clinical outcomes for prostate cancer patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PBT on cancer survival and recurrence for patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP).
METHODS
A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane libraries was performed to identify all eligible studies that evaluate the association between PBT and clinical outcomes for prostate cancer patients undergoing RP. The analyzed outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 3, 5, and 10 years.
RESULTS
A total of eight articles met our criteria. Meta-analysis indicated that prostate cancer patients with PBT had decreased OS (hazard ratio [HR] =1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-1.85, P < 0.01; HR = 1.57, 95% CI, 1.33-1.85, P < 0.01; HR = 1.55, 95% CI, 1.03-2.33, P = 0.04) and RFS (HR = 1.67, 95% CI, 1.37-2.04, P < 0.01; HR = 1.42, 95% CI, 1.23-1.63, P < 0.01; HR = 1.37, 95% CI, 1.03-1.83, P = 0.03) at 3, 5, and 10 years after surgery compared with those without PBT.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from the current meta-analysis demonstrate that PBT was associated with adverse survival and recurrence outcomes for prostate cancer patients undergoing RP.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Perioperative Period; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Transfusion Reaction
PubMed: 30249890
DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.193115 -
Journal of Geriatric Oncology Sep 2023Sarcopenia is a common skeletal muscle disorder in older people. Here we explore the prevalence of sarcopenia and its impact on men with prostate cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Sarcopenia is a common skeletal muscle disorder in older people. Here we explore the prevalence of sarcopenia and its impact on men with prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies with an explicit definition of sarcopenia in men with prostate cancer which were published between years 2000 and 2022. Prevalence of sarcopenia and its association with time to biochemical recurrence (BCR), progression-free survival (PFS), non-cancer mortality, overall survival (OS), and treatment-related complications in men with prostate cancer were explored. The summary prevalence, hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS
A total of 24 studies comprising 3,616 patients with early and advanced prostate cancer were included. The prevalence of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity was 43.8% (95% CI 19.2%-68.5%) and 24.0% (95% CI 5.0%-43.1%), respectively. Sarcopenia was not associated with a shorter time to BCR (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64-1.23, p = 0.48), a shorter PFS (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.73-1.97, p = 0.48), or a shorter OS (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90-1.85, p = 0.16). In contrast, sarcopenia was significantly associated with a higher non-cancer mortality (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.23-2.80, p = 0.003). In four out of five studies eligible for assessment, sarcopenia was not associated with an increased risk of treatment-related complications.
DISCUSSION
Sarcopenia increases the risk of death from other causes in men with prostate cancer. Patients with prostate cancer should be assessed and managed for sarcopenia in everyday clinical practice.
Topics: Male; Humans; Aged; Sarcopenia; Prostatic Neoplasms; Obesity; Proportional Hazards Models; Prognosis
PubMed: 37482497
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2023.101594 -
The World Journal of Men's Health Jul 2021Prostate cancer is the third most common cancer in men globally, and the most common cancer among men in the United States. Dietary choices may play an important role in... (Review)
Review
Prostate cancer is the third most common cancer in men globally, and the most common cancer among men in the United States. Dietary choices may play an important role in developing prostate cancer; in particular, a higher dairy product intake has been associated with an increased risk of developing prostate cancer. The overall positive association between milk consumption and the risk of prostate cancer development and prostate cancer mortality has been well documented in multiple epidemiological studies. However, there is limited literature on the association between types of milk, as classified by fat content (skim, low fat, and whole), and the risk of developing prostate cancer. When further examining current state of the literature on this topic, there is a number of epidemiologic studies assessing the relationship between prostate cancer and milk consumption. On the contrary, very few experimental studies explore this topic. Further experimental research may be necessary to examine the relationship between dairy and dairy products consumption and the increased risk of development of prostate cancer. At this time, there are no formal clinical recommendations regarding dairy products consumption for patients who are at risk of prostate cancer development or who have a history of prostate cancer. In this manuscript, we sought to systematically review the existing literature on the association between milk consumption classified by fat content, and the risk of developing prostate cancer. These findings may be useful for the clinicians who provide recommendations for the patients at risk of developing prostate cancer.
PubMed: 32777868
DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.200051 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024Multiple strategies integrating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data have been proposed to determine the need for a prostate biopsy in men with suspected... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Multiple strategies integrating magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical data have been proposed to determine the need for a prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (Gleason score ≥3 + 4). However, inconsistencies across different strategies create challenges for drawing a definitive conclusion.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the optimal prostate biopsy decision-making strategy for avoiding unnecessary biopsies and minimizing the risk of missing csPCa by combining MRI Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PI-RADS) and clinical data.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to July 1, 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language studies that evaluated men with suspected but not confirmed csPCa who underwent MRI PI-RADS followed by prostate biopsy were included. Each study had proposed a biopsy plan by combining PI-RADS and clinical data.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Studies were independently assessed for eligibility for inclusion. Quality of studies was appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Mixed-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression models with multimodel inference were performed. Reporting of this study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Independent risk factors of csPCa were determined by performing meta-regression between the rate of csPCa and PI-RADS and clinical parameters. Yields of different biopsy strategies were assessed by performing diagnostic meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The analyses included 72 studies comprising 36 366 patients. Univariable meta-regression showed that PI-RADS 4 (β-coefficient [SE], 7.82 [3.85]; P = .045) and PI-RADS 5 (β-coefficient [SE], 23.18 [4.46]; P < .001) lesions, but not PI-RADS 3 lesions (β-coefficient [SE], -4.08 [3.06]; P = .19), were significantly associated with a higher risk of csPCa. When considered jointly in a multivariable model, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD) was the only clinical variable significantly associated with csPCa (β-coefficient [SE], 15.50 [5.14]; P < .001) besides PI-RADS 5 (β-coefficient [SE], 9.19 [3.33]; P < .001). Avoiding biopsy in patients with lesions with PI-RADS category of 3 or less and PSAD less than 0.10 (vs <0.15) ng/mL2 resulted in reducing 30% (vs 48%) of unnecessary biopsies (compared with performing biopsy in all suspected patients), with an estimated sensitivity of 97% (vs 95%) and number needed to harm of 17 (vs 15).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that in patients with suspected csPCa, patient-tailored prostate biopsy decisions based on PI-RADS and PSAD could prevent unnecessary procedures while maintaining high sensitivity.
Topics: Male; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostate; Biopsy
PubMed: 38551559
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.4258