-
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 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2023The involvement of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the prostate carcinogenesis is a controversial issue. The presented meta-analysis was carried out to systematize the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The involvement of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the prostate carcinogenesis is a controversial issue. The presented meta-analysis was carried out to systematize the currently available research results regarding this question. The meta-analysis includes case-control studies from 1991 to 2022, which were collected from publicly available bibliometric databases. The meta-analysis was performed using Meta-Essentials_1.5 software. We used Begg's and Egger's methods to assess publication bias. Cochran's Q test was used to assess heterogeneity and the I index was employed for calculating the variation in the pooled estimations. The analysis was based on data from 27 case-control studies, which in total yielded 1607 tumour tissue samples of prostate and 1515 control samples (317 samples of normal tissue, 1198 samples of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)). According to the data obtained, there was high risk of prostate cancer by HPV infection in both cases. HPV was found in prostate cancer in 25.8% of cases, while in normal tissue samples the virus was detected in 9.2% of cases and in 17.4% with BPH as a control. In particular, more studies on the association of HPV and prostate cancer are needed to prove the role of HPV in the development of prostate cancer. In addition to the controversial question of whether HPV infection is associated with prostate cancer risk, it is worth considering whether the samples used as a control have an impact on the results. The impact of HPV in prostate tumour tissue samples on outcome should also be investigated.
Topics: Male; Humans; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Papillomaviridae; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37789036
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43767-7 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2020Contemporary minimally invasive surgical (MIS) treatment options of patients with male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in men with prostate glands >80 mL include... (Review)
Review
Contemporary minimally invasive surgical (MIS) treatment options of patients with male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in men with prostate glands >80 mL include Holmium Laser Enucleation Prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser VapoEnucleation Prostate (ThuVEP), and Laparoscopic (LSP) or Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP). Implementing new laser technologies is costly, and the steep learning curve of these laser techniques limit their wide range use. This promoted the use of LSP and RASP in centers with readily established laparoscopy or robotic surgery programs. The aim of this study is to review case and comparative series of RASP. We systematically reviewed published data from 2008 to 2020 on RASP and have identified 26 non-comparative and 9 comparative case series. RASP has longer operation time but less time spent in hospital and less blood loss. The outcomes of improvements in symptom score, post-voiding residual urine (PVR), postoperative PSA decline, complications, and cost are similar when compared to open and laser enucleation techniques. These outcomes position RASP as a viable MIS treatment option for patients with male LUTS needing surgical treatment for enlarged prostates. Nevertheless, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with multicenter and large sample size are needed to confirm the findings of this systematic review.
PubMed: 32527020
DOI: 10.3390/jcm9061798 -
BMC Public Health Jun 2023Association of cigarette smoking habits with the risk of prostate cancer is still a matter of debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Association of cigarette smoking habits with the risk of prostate cancer is still a matter of debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between cigarette smoking and prostate cancer risk.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science without language or time restrictions on June 11, 2022. Literature search and study screening were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Prospective cohort studies that assessed the association between cigarette smoking habits and the risk of prostate cancer were included. Quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We used random-effects models to obtain pooled estimates and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 7296 publications were screened, of which 44 cohort studies were identified for qualitative analysis; 39 articles comprising 3 296 398 participants and 130 924 cases were selected for further meta-analysis. Current smoking had a significantly reduced risk of prostate cancer (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.68-0.80; P < 0.001), especially in studies completed in the prostate-specific antigen screening era. Compared to former smokers, current smokers had a significant lower risk of PCa (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.65-0.75; P < 0.001). Ever smoking showed no association with prostate cancer risk in overall analyses (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-1.00; P = 0.074), but an increased risk of prostate cancer in the pre-prostate-specific antigen screening era (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.10; P = 0.046) and a lower risk of prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen screening era (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99; P = 0.011) were observed. Former smoking did not show any association with the risk of prostate cancer.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that the lower risk of prostate cancer in smokers can probably be attributed to their poor adherence to cancer screening and the occurrence of deadly smoking-related diseases, and we should take measures to help smokers to be more compliant with early cancer screening and to quit smoking.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022326464).
Topics: Male; Humans; Cigarette Smoking; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prospective Studies; Smoking; Prostatic Neoplasms; Habits
PubMed: 37316851
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-16085-w -
International Journal of Urology :... Mar 2016It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen... (Review)
Review
It is worth distinguishing between the two strategies of expectant management for prostate cancer. Watchful waiting entails administering non-curative androgen deprivation therapy to patients on development of symptomatic progression, whereas active surveillance entails delivering curative treatment on signs of disease progression. The objectives of the two management strategies and the patients enrolled in either are different: (i) to review the role of active surveillance as a management strategy for patients with low-risk prostate cancer; and (ii) review the benefits and pitfalls of active surveillance. We carried out a systematic review of active surveillance for prostate cancer in the literature using the National Center for Biotechnology Information's electronic database, PubMed. We carried out a search in English using the terms: active surveillance, prostate cancer, watchful waiting and conservative management. Selected studies were required to have a comprehensive description of the demographic and disease characteristics of the patients at the time of diagnosis, inclusion criteria for surveillance, and a protocol for the patients' follow up. Review articles were included, but not multiple papers from the same datasets. Active surveillance appears to reduce overtreatment in patients with low-risk prostate cancer without compromising cancer-specific survival at 10 years. Therefore, active surveillance is an option for select patients who want to avoid the side-effects inherent to the different types of immediate treatment. However, inclusion criteria for active surveillance and the most appropriate method of monitoring patients on active surveillance have not yet been standardized.
Topics: Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Disease Progression; Humans; Male; Medical Overuse; Neoplasm Grading; Prostate; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 26621054
DOI: 10.1111/iju.13016 -
Molecular Cancer May 2016Prostate cancer, the second most frequently diagnosed cancer in males worldwide, is estimated to be diagnosed in 1.1 million men per year. Introduction of PSA testing... (Review)
Review
Prostate cancer, the second most frequently diagnosed cancer in males worldwide, is estimated to be diagnosed in 1.1 million men per year. Introduction of PSA testing substantially improved early detection of prostate cancer, however it also led to overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment of patients with an indolent disease. Treatment outcome and management of prostate cancer could be improved by the development of non-invasive biomarker assays that aid in increasing the sensitivity and specificity of prostate cancer screening, help to distinguish aggressive from indolent disease and guide therapeutic decisions. Prostate cancer cells release miRNAs into the bloodstream, where they exist incorporated into ribonucleoprotein complexes or extracellular vesicles. Later, cell-free miRNAs have been found in various other biofluids. The initial RNA sequencing studies suggested that most of the circulating cell-free miRNAs in healthy individuals are derived from blood cells, while specific disease-associated miRNA signatures may appear in the circulation of patients affected with various diseases, including cancer. This raised a hope that cell-free miRNAs may serve as non-invasive biomarkers for prostate cancer. Indeed, a number of cell-free miRNAs that potentially may serve as diagnostic, prognostic or predictive biomarkers have been discovered in blood or other biofluids of prostate cancer patients and need to be validated in appropriately designed longitudinal studies and clinical trials. In this review, we systematically summarise studies investigating cell-free miRNAs in biofluids of prostate cancer patients and discuss the utility of the identified biomarkers in various clinical scenarios. Furthermore, we discuss the possible mechanisms of miRNA release into biofluids and outline the biological questions and technical challenges that have arisen from these studies.
Topics: Biological Transport; Biomarkers, Tumor; Body Fluids; Disease Management; Extracellular Vesicles; Gene Expression Profiling; Genetic Testing; Humans; Male; MicroRNAs; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms; Transcriptome
PubMed: 27189160
DOI: 10.1186/s12943-016-0523-5 -
European Journal of Surgical Oncology :... Apr 2022Metastatic spread to the rectum is a rare finding, and management of rectal metastases (RM) is not standardized. The aim of the present study was to review the evidence... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Metastatic spread to the rectum is a rare finding, and management of rectal metastases (RM) is not standardized. The aim of the present study was to review the evidence on diagnosis, management and outcomes of RM.
METHODS
A computerized literature search through MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane databases was performed, applying a combination of terms related to RM. Articles and abstracts were screened and final selection was done after cross-referencing and by use of predefined eligibility criteria.
RESULTS
Final analysis was based on 99 publications totaling 162 patients with RM from 16 different primary tumors. Most common origins of RM were breast (42 patients), stomach (38 patients), and prostate (16 patients). RM occurred metachronously in the majority of patients (77%). The main treatment was surgical resection (n = 32), followed by chemotherapy (n = 16). Median overall survival for breast RM, stomach RM, and prostate RM were 24 months (95% CI 9-39 months), 7 months (95% CI 0-14 months), and 24 months (95% CI 7-41 months), respectively.
CONCLUSION
RM is a rare and highly heterogeneous condition. Surgical treatment appears to be a valuable treatment option in selected patients, while overall prognosis depends mainly on the primary tumor.
Topics: Humans; Male; Melanoma; Prognosis; Prostate; Rectum; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 34656391
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.10.004 -
Investigative and Clinical Urology Mar 2016Urosepsis is the most feared complication of transrectal prostate biopsy. The incidence may be increasing from <1% to 2%-3% in contemporary series. Historically,... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Urosepsis is the most feared complication of transrectal prostate biopsy. The incidence may be increasing from <1% to 2%-3% in contemporary series. Historically, fluoroquinolones have been effective antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infective complications but antibiotic resistance is increasing. The increase in antibiotic resistance may contribute to reported increases in urosepsis and hospitalization after transrectal biopsy. This article will review other methods clinicians may employ to reduce the incidence of infective complications after prostate biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted using literature databases PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE in August 2015 in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) criteria.
RESULTS
Effective strategies to reduce infective complications after transrectal prostate biopsy include augmented prophylaxis with other antibiotics, rectal swab culture directed antibiotic prophylaxis or a transperineal biopsy approach. Needle disinfection, minimizing the number of biopsy needles and rectal disinfectants may also be of use. These methods may be of particular utility in patients with risk factors for developing urosepsis such as recent antibiotic use and overseas travel.
CONCLUSIONS
The scientific literature describes various techniques designed to reduce infective complications caused by prostate biopsy. Clinicians should consider incorporating these novel techniques into their contemporary practice.
Topics: Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Biopsy, Needle; Cross Infection; Disinfection; Humans; Male; Needles; Prostate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Sepsis
PubMed: 26981590
DOI: 10.4111/icu.2016.57.2.94 -
Cancer Treatment Reviews Nov 2018While a number of studies indicate tobacco smoking has a detrimental impact on survival and recurrence after a prostate cancer diagnosis, there has been no quantitative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
While a number of studies indicate tobacco smoking has a detrimental impact on survival and recurrence after a prostate cancer diagnosis, there has been no quantitative review of this literature and it is unclear whether tobacco smoking affects clinical populations differentially. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the associations between tobacco smoking and overall (OM) and prostate cancer-specific (PSM) mortality and recurrence after a prostate cancer diagnosis.
METHODS
EMBASE and ISI Web of Science were searched for English-language studies, published up to August 17, 2017, which conducted a survival analysis to estimate the association between tobacco smoking and OM, PSM and/or recurrence. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the summary hazard ratios (HRs) for the associations between tobacco smoking and the three outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria. The results of the primary meta-analysis indicate current smokers have significantly poorer overall survival (Summary HR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.69, 2.28), prostate cancer-specific survival (Summary HR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.47, 2.20) and recurrence-free survival (Summary HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.28, 1.72) than never smokers. Similar results were found in population-based studies and in studies conducted in specific clinical populations.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that tobacco smoking at prostate cancer diagnosis is associated with a significantly increased risk of overall mortality, prostate-cancer specific mortality and recurrence. We recommend future studies collect more detailed information about tobacco smoking to further understanding of the association between tobacco smoking and PCa prognosis. In addition, further research should concentrate on the impact of smoking cessation post-diagnosis and post-treatment on prognosis, and the feasibility and effectiveness of smoking cessation programs.
Topics: Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Survival Rate; Tobacco Smoking
PubMed: 30055462
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.07.001 -
Annual Review of Nutrition Aug 2012Although obesity is a well-known risk factor for several cancers, its role on cancer survival is poorly understood. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess... (Review)
Review
Although obesity is a well-known risk factor for several cancers, its role on cancer survival is poorly understood. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the current evidence evaluating the impact of body adiposity on the prognosis of the three most common obesity-related cancers: prostate, colorectal, and breast. We included 33 studies of breast cancer, six studies of prostate cancer, and eight studies of colo-rectal cancer. We note that the evidence overrepresents breast cancer survivorship research and is sparse for prostate and colorectal cancers. Overall, most studies support a relationship between body adiposity and site-specific mortality or cancer progression. However, most of the research was not specifically designed to study these outcomes and, therefore, several methodological issues should be considered before integrating their results to draw conclusions. Further research is urgently warranted to assess the long-term impact of obesity among the growing population of cancer survivors.
Topics: Adiposity; Biomedical Research; Breast Neoplasms; Colorectal Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasms; Obesity; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms; Research Design
PubMed: 22540252
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-nutr-071811-150713