-
Urologia Nov 2023Most genitourinary tract cancers have a negative impact on male fertility. Although testicular cancers have the worst impact, other tumors such as prostate, bladder, and... (Review)
Review
Most genitourinary tract cancers have a negative impact on male fertility. Although testicular cancers have the worst impact, other tumors such as prostate, bladder, and penis are diagnosed early and treated in relatively younger patients in which couple fertility can be an important concern. The purpose of this review is to highlight both the pathogenetic mechanisms of damage to male fertility in the context of the main urological cancers and the methods of preserving male fertility in an oncological setting, in light of the most recent scientific evidence. A systematic review of available literature was carried out on the main scientific search engines, such as PubMed, Clinicaltrials.Gov, and Google scholar. Three hundred twenty-five relevant articles on this subject were identified, 98 of which were selected being the most relevant to the purpose of this review. There is a strong evidence in literature that all of the genitourinary oncological therapies have a deep negative impact on male fertility: orchiectomy, partial orchiectomy, retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (RPLND), radical cystectomy, prostatectomy, penectomy, as well as radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal androgen suppression. Preservation of fertility is possible and includes cryopreservation, hormonal manipulation with GnRH analogs before chemotherapy, androgen replacement. Germ cell auto transplantation is an intriguing strategy with future perspectives. Careful evaluation of male fertility must be a key point before treating genitourinary tumors, taking into account patients' age and couples' perspectives. Informed consent should provide adequate information to the patient about the current state of his fertility and about the balance between risks and benefits in oncological terms. Standard approaches to genitourinary tumors should include a multidisciplinary team with urologists, oncologists, radiotherapists, psycho-sexologists, andrologists, gynecologists, and reproductive endocrinologists.
Topics: Humans; Male; Fertility Preservation; Androgens; Infertility, Male; Testicular Neoplasms; Urologic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37491831
DOI: 10.1177/03915603221146147 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2016Interval debulking surgery (IDS), following induction or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, may have a role in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stage III to IV) where... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Interval debulking surgery (IDS), following induction or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, may have a role in treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (stage III to IV) where primary debulking surgery is not an option.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and complications of IDS for women with advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2012, Issue 6, MEDLINE and EMBASE for the original review in to June 2012. We updated the searches in June 2009, 2012 and 2015 for the review updates.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing survival of women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, who had IDS performed between cycles of chemotherapy after primary surgery with survival of women who had conventional treatment (primary debulking surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Searches for additional information from study authors were attempted. We performed meta-analysis of overall and progression-free survival (PFS), using random-effects models.
MAIN RESULTS
Three RCTs randomising 853 women, of whom 781 were evaluated, met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of three trials for overall survival (OS) found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.06, I² = 58%). Subgroup analysis for OS in two trials, where the primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive, showed a benefit of IDS (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.87, I² = 0%). Meta-analysis of two trials for PFS found no statistically significant difference between IDS and chemotherapy alone (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.33, I² = 83%). Rates of toxic reactions to chemotherapy were similar in both arms (risk ratio = 1.19, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.66, I² = 0%), but little information was available for other adverse events or quality or life (QoL).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no conclusive evidence to determine whether IDS between cycles of chemotherapy would improve or decrease the survival rates of women with advanced ovarian cancer, compared with conventional treatment of primary surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. IDS appeared to yield benefit only in women whose primary surgery was not performed by gynaecologic oncologists or was less extensive. Data on QoL and adverse events were inconclusive.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Humans; Induction Chemotherapy; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Ovarian Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Rate; Tumor Burden
PubMed: 26747297
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006014.pub7 -
Biomedical Engineering Online Nov 2023The contouring of organs at risk (OARs) in head and neck cancer radiation treatment planning is a crucial, yet repetitive and time-consuming process. Recent studies have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The contouring of organs at risk (OARs) in head and neck cancer radiation treatment planning is a crucial, yet repetitive and time-consuming process. Recent studies have applied deep learning (DL) algorithms to automatically contour head and neck OARs. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize and analyze the performance of DL algorithms in contouring head and neck OARs. The objective is to assess the advantages and limitations of DL algorithms in contour planning of head and neck OARs.
METHODS
This study conducted a literature search of Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases, to include studies related to DL contouring head and neck OARs, and the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of four categories of OARs from the results of each study are selected as effect sizes for meta-analysis. Furthermore, this study conducted a subgroup analysis of OARs characterized by image modality and image type.
RESULTS
149 articles were retrieved, and 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis after excluding duplicate literature, primary screening, and re-screening. The combined effect sizes of DSC for brainstem, spinal cord, mandible, left eye, right eye, left optic nerve, right optic nerve, optic chiasm, left parotid, right parotid, left submandibular, and right submandibular are 0.87, 0.83, 0.92, 0.90, 0.90, 0.71, 0.74, 0.62, 0.85, 0.85, 0.82, and 0.82, respectively. For subgroup analysis, the combined effect sizes for segmentation of the brainstem, mandible, left optic nerve, and left parotid gland using CT and MRI images are 0.86/0.92, 0.92/0.90, 0.71/0.73, and 0.84/0.87, respectively. Pooled effect sizes using 2D and 3D images of the brainstem, mandible, left optic nerve, and left parotid gland for contouring are 0.88/0.87, 0.92/0.92, 0.75/0.71 and 0.87/0.85.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of automated contouring technology based on DL algorithms is an essential tool for contouring head and neck OARs, achieving high accuracy, reducing the workload of clinical radiation oncologists, and providing individualized, standardized, and refined treatment plans for implementing "precision radiotherapy". Improving DL performance requires the construction of high-quality data sets and enhancing algorithm optimization and innovation.
Topics: Humans; Deep Learning; Organs at Risk; Head; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Algorithms; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 37915046
DOI: 10.1186/s12938-023-01159-y -
Surgical Endoscopy Apr 2022Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to summarize best evidence and develop a rapid guideline using transparent, trustworthy, and standardized methodology.
METHODS
We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE, G-I-N, and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of four general surgeons practicing colorectal surgery, a radiologist with expertise in rectal cancer, a radiation oncologist, a pathologist, and a patient representative. We conducted a systematic review and the results of evidence synthesis by means of meta-analyses were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus.
RESULTS
This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation for the use of TaTME over laparoscopic or robotic TME for low rectal cancer when expertise is available. Furthermore, it details evidence gaps to be addressed by future research and discusses policy considerations. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries, and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494 .
CONCLUSIONS
This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the use of TaTME for rectal cancer.
Topics: GRADE Approach; Humans; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 35212821
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09090-4 -
The Oncologist Oct 2017Although patient-driven second opinions are increasingly sought in oncology, the desirability of this trend remains unknown. Therefore, this systematic review assesses... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although patient-driven second opinions are increasingly sought in oncology, the desirability of this trend remains unknown. Therefore, this systematic review assesses evidence on the motivation for and frequency of requests for second opinions and examines how they evolve and their consequences for oncological practice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Relevant databases were sought using the terms "cancer," "second opinion," and "self-initiated." Included were peer-reviewed articles that reported on patient-initiated second opinions within oncology. Selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed and discussed by two researchers.
RESULTS
Of the 25 included studies, the methodological designs were qualitative ( = 4), mixed ( = 1), or quantitative ( = 20). Study quality was rated high for 10 studies, moderate for eight, and low for seven studies. Reported rates of second opinion seeking ranged from 1%-88%. Higher education was most consistently related to seeking a second opinion. Patients' primary motivations were a perceived need for certainty or confirmation, a lack of trust, dissatisfaction with communication, and/or a need for more (personalized) information. Reported rates of diagnostic or therapeutic discrepancies between the first and second opinions ranged from 2%-51%.
DISCUSSION
Additional studies are required to further examine the medical, practical, and psychological consequences of second opinions for patients and oncologists. Future studies could compare the potential advantages and disadvantages of second opinion seeking, and might offer guidance to patients and physicians to better facilitate the second opinion process. Some practical recommendations are provided for oncologists to optimally discuss and conduct second opinions with their patients. 2017;22:1197-1211 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although cancer patients increasingly seek a second opinion, the benefits of this process remain unclear. Results of this systematic review suggest that the available studies on this topic are highly variable in both methodology and quality. Moreover, reported rates for a second opinion (1%-88%) as well as for disagreement between the first and second opinion (2%-51%) range widely. The primary motivations of patients are a need for certainty, lack of trust, dissatisfaction with communication, and/or a need for more (personalized) information. Additional research should evaluate how unnecessary second opinions might be avoided. Practical suggestions are provided for oncologists to optimize second opinions.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Patient Satisfaction; Physician-Patient Relations; Qualitative Research; Referral and Consultation
PubMed: 28606972
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0429 -
La Clinica Terapeutica 2023Cancer, a potentially fatal condition, is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Among males aged 20 to 35, the most common cancer in healthy individuals is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer, a potentially fatal condition, is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Among males aged 20 to 35, the most common cancer in healthy individuals is testicular cancer, accounting for 1% to 2% of all cancers in men.
METHODS
Throughout this review, we have employed a targeted research approach, carefully handpicking the most representative and relevant articles on the subject. Our methodology involved a systematic review of the scientific literature to ensure a comprehensive and accurate overview of the available sources.
RESULTS
The onset and spread of testicular cancer are significantly influenced by genetic changes, including mutations in oncogenes, tu-mor suppressor genes, and DNA repair genes. As a result of identifying these specific genetic mutations in cancers, targeted medications have been developed to disrupt the signaling pathways affected by these genetic changes. To improve the diagnosis and treatment of this disease, it is crucial to understand its natural and clinical histories.
CONCLUSIONS
In order to comprehend cancer better and to discover new biomarkers and therapeutic targets, oncologists are increasingly employing omics methods, such as genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics. Targeted medications that focus on specific genetic pathways and mutations hold promise for advancing the diagnosis and management of this disease.
Topics: Humans; Male; Testicular Neoplasms; Precision Medicine; Genomics; Proteomics
PubMed: 37994745
DOI: 10.7417/CT.2023.2468 -
The Oncologist Mar 2014Sorafenib was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for radioiodine-resistant metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). In addition, two drugs... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sorafenib was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for radioiodine-resistant metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). In addition, two drugs (vandetanib and cabozantinib) have received U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for use in medullary thyroid cancer (MTC). Several published phase II trials have investigated the efficacy of sorafenib in thyroid cancers, but to date, results from those studies have not been compared.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess response rate, median progression-free survival, and adverse events associated with sorafenib therapy for metastatic thyroid cancers.
RESULTS
This review included seven trials involving 219 patients: 159 with DTC (papillary, follicular, and poorly differentiated), 52 with MTC, and 8 with anaplastic thyroid cancer. No study reported complete responses to treatment. Overall partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease rates were 21%, 60%, and 20%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 18 months for patients with all subtypes of thyroid cancer. Drug was discontinued in 16% of patients because of toxicities or intolerance, and the dose was reduced in a further 56%. Side effects with an incidence ≥ 50% were hand-foot syndrome (74%), diarrhea (70%), skin rash (67%), fatigue (61%), and weight loss (57%). Deaths not related to progressive disease occurred in nearly 4% of patients.
CONCLUSION
Treatment with sorafenib in patients with progressive DTC and MTC is a promising strategy, but the adverse event rate is high, leading to a high rate of dose reduction or discontinuation. Consequently, sorafenib use in patients with metastatic thyroid cancer requires careful selection of patients and careful management of side effects.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Metastasis; Niacinamide; Phenylurea Compounds; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sorafenib; Thyroid Neoplasms
PubMed: 24563075
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0362 -
Spine Oct 2016Systematic literature review. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic literature review.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the toxicity, common radiation doses, and local control (LC) rates of radiation therapy for chordoma of the spine and sacrum and identify the difference in LC and toxicity between adjuvant, salvage, and primary therapy using radiation.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Chordoma of the spine is typically a low-grade malignant tumor thought to be relatively radioresistant with a high rate of local recurrence and the potential for metastases. Improved results of modern radiation therapy in the treatment of chordoma support exploration of its role in the management of primary/de novo chordoma or recurrent chordoma.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature review using PubMed and Embase databases to assess information available regarding the toxicity, LC rates, and overall survival (OS) rates for adjuvant, salvage, and primary radiation therapy for spinal and sacral chordoma.
RESULTS
A total of 40 articles were reviewed. Evidence quality was low or very low. The highest rates of LC and OS were with early adjuvant RT for primary/de novo disease. Salvage RT for recurrent disease has very small cohorts and thus strong conclusions were not able be made.
CONCLUSION
The use of pre- and/or post-operative photon image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), proton or carbon ion therapy should be considered for patients undergoing surgery for the treatment of primary and recurrent chordomas in the mobile spine and sacrum, since these RT modalities may improve local control. Preoperative evaluation by the surgeon and radiation oncologist should be used to formulate a cohesive treatment plan.The use of photon IGRT or carbon ion therapy as the primary treatment of chordoma, when currently in its developmental stage, shows promise and requires clear delineation of toxicity profile and long-term local control.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
2.
Topics: Chordoma; Humans; Proton Therapy; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Sacrum; Spinal Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27509195
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001831 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Aug 2016To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.
METHODS
American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, gastroenterology, palliative care, and advocacy experts to conduct a systematic review of the literature from April 2004 to June 2015. Outcomes were overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events.
RESULTS
Twenty-four randomized controlled trials met the systematic review criteria.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A multiphase computed tomography scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be performed. Baseline performance status and comorbidity profile should be evaluated. Goals of care, patient preferences, treatment response, psychological status, support systems, and symptom burden should guide decisions for treatments. A palliative care referral should occur at first visit. FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin; favorable comorbidity profile) or gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound (NAB) -paclitaxel (adequate comorbidity profile) should be offered to patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0 to 1 based on patient preference and support system available. Gemcitabine alone is recommended for patients with ECOG PS 2 or with a comorbidity profile that precludes other regimens; the addition of capecitabine or erlotinib may be offered. Patients with an ECOG PS ≥ 3 and poorly controlled comorbid conditions should be offered cancer-directed therapy only on a case-by-case basis; supportive care should be emphasized. For second-line therapy, gemcitabine plus NAB-paclitaxel should be offered to patients with first-line treatment with FOLFIRINOX, an ECOG PS 0 to 1, and a favorable comorbidity profile; fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin, irinotecan, or nanoliposomal irinotecan should be offered to patients with first-line treatment with gemcitabine plus NAB-paclitaxel, ECOG PS 0 to 1, and favorable comorbidity profile, and gemcitabine or fluorouracil should be offered to patients with either an ECOG PS 2 or a comorbidity profile that precludes other regimens. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/MetPC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Communication; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Pain Management; Palliative Care; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Patient Care Planning; Patient Care Team; Symptom Assessment
PubMed: 27247222
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.1412 -
Head and Neck Pathology Jun 2022The aim of the present study was to integrate the available data published in the literature on oral and maxillofacial neuroendocrine carcinomas concerning the... (Review)
Review
The aim of the present study was to integrate the available data published in the literature on oral and maxillofacial neuroendocrine carcinomas concerning the demographic, clinical and histopathological features of this condition. An electronic search with no publication date restriction was undertaken in April 2021 in four databases. Eligibility criteria included reports published in English having enough data to confirm a definite diagnosis, always showing a neuroendocrine marker. Cases originating in the oropharynx, including base of the tongue and tonsils, were excluded. Outcomes were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method along with Cox regression. Twenty-five articles (29 cases) from nine different countries were detected. Mean patient age was 56.3 (± 17.5) years, with a slight male predilection. Symptomatology was present in 72.2% of informed cases. Regarding clinical presentation, a non-ulcerated nodule located in the gingiva with a mean size of 3.4 (± 2.0) cm was most frequently reported. Concomitant metastasis was identified in seven individuals. Histopathologically, most neoplasms were of the small cell type, and immunohistochemistry for both epithelial and neuroendocrine differentiation was used in 65.5% cases. Radical surgery was the treatment of choice in almost all cases, with or without adjuvant therapy. Mean follow-up was 20.5 (± 21.2) months, and only four patients developed recurrences. Eleven (44.0%) individuals died due to the disease. Ulcerated lesions were a prognostic factor. This study provides knowledge that can assist surgeons, oncologists, and oral and maxillofacial pathologists with the diagnosis and management of neuroendocrine carcinomas. Our findings demonstrated that the long-term prognosis of this lesion continues to be poor.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Carcinoma, Neuroendocrine; Humans; Immunohistochemistry; Male; Middle Aged; Prognosis
PubMed: 34870796
DOI: 10.1007/s12105-021-01398-2