No abstract

We aimed to assess whether the ongoing course of the COVID-19 epidemic has been associated with an increased risk of adverse pathology (AP) findings in prostate cancer (PC) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We performed a retrospective data analysis which included 408 consecutive, non-metastatic, previously untreated PC patients who underwent RP in our institution between March 2020 and September 2021. Patients were divided into two equally numbered groups in regard to the median surgery date (Early Epidemic [EE] and Late Epidemic [LE]) and compared. Adverse pathology was defined as either grade group (GG) ≥ 4, pT ≥ 3a or pN+ at RP. Patients in the LE group demonstrated significantly higher rates of AP than in the EE group (61 vs. 43% overall and 50 vs. 27% in preoperative non-high-risk subgroup, both p < 0.001), mainly due to higher rates of upgrading. On multivariable analysis, consecutive epidemic week (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.00–1.03, p = 0.009) as well as biopsy GG ≥ 2 and a larger prostate volume (mL) were associated with AP in non-high-risk patients. The study serves as a warning call for increased awareness of risk underassessment in contemporarily treated PC patients.

To compare oncological and functional outcomes of high-intensity focused-ultrasound (HIFU) focal therapy (FT) versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in patients treated for low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa), we retrospectively analyzed data of consecutive patients comprising 30 men, who underwent HIFU-FT, and 96 men who underwent LRP, in an academic center. Oncological outcomes were assessed based on the follow-up prostate-specific antigen values. We used the International Index of Erectile Function short form score to assess erectile function (EF). Urinary continence status was defined based on the number of pads used per day. Median follow-up was 12.5 and 19.1 months in the LRP and HIFU-FT groups, respectively. The effects were computed after propensity score matching and expressed as average treatment effect (ATE). Compared to LRP, HIFU-FT was associated with increased risk of treatment failure (ATE 0.103–0.164, depending on definition, p < 0.01) and lower risk of urinary incontinence (ATE −0.808 at 12 months, p < 0.01). Risk of erectile dysfunction was higher in the LRP group (ATE 5.092, p < 0.01). Our results demonstrate that HIFU-FT may be a reasonable treatment option in selected PCa patients, willing to preserve their EF and urinary continence yet accepting a higher risk of treatment failure.

No abstract

No abstract

While accurate lymph node status evaluation in urothelial carcinoma patients is essential for the correct disease staging and, hence, establishing the most beneficial treatment strategy, the diagnostic performance of routine imaging in regards to this issue is not satisfactory. For the purpose of this article, we systematically reviewed the contemporary literature on the sensitivity and specificity of particular imaging modalities which have been studied for detecting lymph node metastases in patients diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma. The evidence reviewed shows that computed tomography (CT), although recognized as the imaging modality of choice, is associated with marked limitations, resulting in its low sensitivity for lymph node involvement detection in urothelial carcinoma patients, with no study reporting a value higher than 46% using standard cut-off values. Markedly higher sensitivity rates may be achieved with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), especially when using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide as the contrast agent, however, no uniform protocol has been systematically studied up to date. The vast majority of recent evidence concerns positron emission tomography (PET), which is being reported to improve the diagnostic performance of CT alone, as has been demonstrated in multiple articles, which investigated the accuracy of PET/CT at primary or post-treatment staging of urothelial carcinoma patients. However, there has been substantial heterogeneity in terms of methodology and results between those studies, making it premature to draw any definitive conclusions. The results of this review lead to a conclusion, that while CT, despite being not fully satisfactory, still remains the gold-standard method of imaging for staging purposes in urothelial carcinoma, other imaging modalities are under investigation, with promising results.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and clinical features of incidental bladder cancer (BC) diagnosis, with special emphasis on possible associations between incidental diagnosis and primary disease stage or grade. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively included 501 consecutive patients who underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumor and were diagnosed with primary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder between January 2013 and February 2021 in a university hospital. The type of diagnosis (incidental or nonincidental), patient baseline characteristics and primary stage and grade were studied for interdependencies. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 28.5% of all patients and 19.8% of high grade (HG) BC patients had been diagnosed incidentally, most commonly with ultrasound. Incidental diagnosis was associated with lower primary stage and grade of the disease. Most importantly, on multivariable analysis, which included baseline patient characteristics and type of diagnosis, in the subgroup of HG BC patients, muscle-invasive BC (MIBC) or metastatic disease was three times less likely to be diagnosed incidentally than non-MIBC (odds ratio: 0.31, 95% confidence interval: 0.14–0.71, <i>p</i> = 0.006). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The study is first to demonstrate that incidental diagnosis of HG BC may be surprisingly prevalent and associated with lower rates of muscle invasion or metastatic disease.

Prostate biopsy is recommended in cases of positive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), defined as Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) category ≥ 3. However, most men with positive MRIs will not be diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC). Our goal was to evaluate pre-biopsy characteristics that influence the probability of a csPC diagnosis in these patients. We retrospectively analyzed 740 consecutive men with a positive MRI and no prior PC diagnosis who underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsies of the prostate in three centers. csPC detection rates (CDRs) for each PIRADS category were calculated. Patient, disease, and lesion characteristics were studied for interdependencies with the csPC diagnosis. The CDR in patients with PIRADS categories 3, 4, and 5 was 10.5%, 30.7%, and 54.6%, respectively. On both uni- and multivariable regression models, older age, being biopsy-naïve, prostate specific antigen ≥ 10 ng/mL, smaller prostate volume, PIRADS > 3, a larger maximum lesion size, a lesion in the peripheral zone, and a positive digital rectal examination were associated with csPC. In this large, multicenter study, we provide new data regarding CDRs in particular PIRADS categories. In addition, we present several strong predictors that further alter the risk of csPC in MRI-positive patients. Our results could help in refining individual risk assessment, especially in PIRADS 3 patients, in whom the risk of csPC is substantially low.