Purpose To understand why some patients respond to immunotherapy but many do not, a clear picture of the tumor microenvironment (TME) of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is key. Here we review the current understanding on the immune composition per HNSCC subsite, the importance of the tumor's etiology and the prognostic power of specific immune cells. Recent Findings Large cohort data are mostly based on deconvolution of transcriptional databases. Studies focusing on infiltrate localization often entail small cohorts, a mixture of HNSCC subsites, or focus on a single immune marker rather than the interaction between cells within the TME. Summary Conclusions on the prognostic impact of specific immune cells in HNSCC are hampered by the use of heterogeneous or small cohorts. To move forward, the field should focus on deciphering the immune composition per HNSCC subsite, in powered cohorts and considering the molecular diversity in this disease. Keywords Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma . Tumor microenvironment . Innate and adaptive immune system . Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes . Prognosis . HNSCC subsites Irene H. Nauta and Tara Muijlwijk contributed equally to this work. This article is part of the Topical Collection on Head and Neck Cancers

No abstract

There are no statistically significant differences in the prostate cancer detection rate between 8 and 12-core prostate biopsy protocols. Transition zone biopsies contribute to prostate cancer detection in a repeat biopsy protocol.

The incidence of prostate cancer is increasing, and therefore also the need for optimal treatment. Because of the appearance of many different disease stages different treatment modalities are desirable for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The established therapies, radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy, are associated with a lot of risks, complications and co-morbidity, and not all patients are eligible for these treatments. That is why the need for reliable minimally invasive alternatives has developed. For this paper a literature search was conducted on published studies and review articles to determine the role of HIFU (high intensity focused ultrasound) and cryoablation as minimally invasive treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer. Both therapies are being used as a primary or secondary (salvage) treatment, but can they replace surgery or radiation? And is there a role for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of the prostate to improve diagnostics, treatment outcomes and follow-up? To date the outcomes of both therapies are promising but no prospective and comparative randomized studies with a long term follow-up were available for analysis. From this review we can conclude that until those studies are available, HIFU and cryoablation are good alternatives for patients not eligible for prostatectomy or radiation. They should not be used as a first treatment option as long as diagnostics and follow-up have not improved.