Beyond Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System: Combining Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography PRIMARY Score in a Composite (P) Score for More Accurate Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score is standard of care for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis. The PRIMARY score (prostate-specific membrane antigen [PSMA]-positron emission tomography [PET]/CT) also has high diagnostic accuracy for csPCa. This study aimed to develop an easily calculated combined (P) score for csPCa detection (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] ≥2) incorporating separately read PI-RADS and PRIMARY scores, with external validation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two datasets of men with suspected PCa, no prior biopsy, recent MRI and 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET/CT, and subsequent transperineal biopsy were evaluated. The development sample (n = 291, 56% csPCa) a prospective trial and the validation sample (n = 227, 67% csPCa) a multicenter retrospective database. Primary outcome was detection of csPCa (ISUP ≥2), with ISUP ≥ 3 cancer detection a secondary outcome. Score performance was evaluated by area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: The 5-point combined (P) score was developed in a prospective dataset. In the validation dataset, csPCa was identified in 0%, 20%, 52%, 96%, and 100% for P score 1 to 5. The area under the curve was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.96), higher than PI-RADS 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93, P = .039) and PRIMARY score alone 0.84 (95% CI: 0.79-0.89, P < .001). Splitting scores at 1/2 (negative) vs 3/4/5 (positive), P score sensitivity was 94% (95% CI: 89-97) compared to PI-RADS 89% (95% CI: 83-93) and PRIMARY score 86% (95% CI: 79-91). For ISUP ≥ 3, P score sensitivity was 99% (95% CI: 95-100) vs 94% (95% CI: 88-98) and 92% (95% CI: 85-97) for PI-RADS and PRIMARY scores respectively. A maximum standardized uptake value > 12 (P score 5) was ISUP ≥ 2 in all cases with 93% ISUP ≥ 3. CONCLUSIONS: The P score is easily calculated and improves accuracy for csPCa over both PI-RADS and PRIMARY scores. It should be considered when PSMA-PET is undertaken for diagnosis.

The risk of prostate cancer on incidental finding of an avid prostate uptake on 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for non-prostate cancer-related pathology: A single centre retrospective study.

Objective: To review the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) in men with incidentally reported increased intraprostatic uptake at 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) ordered at Department of Urology, The Wesley Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia for non-PCa related pathology. Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive men between August 2014 and August 2019 presenting to a single institution for 18F-FDG PET/CT for non-prostate related conditions was conducted. Men were classified as benign, indeterminate, or malignant depending of the results of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA velocity, biopsy histopathology, and three-Tesla (3 T) multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score, or gallium-68-prostate-specific membrane antigen (68Ga-PSMA) PET/CT results. Results: Three percent (273/9122) of men demonstrated 18F-FDG avidity within the prostate. Eighty-five percent (231/273) were further investigated, including with PSA tests (227/231, 98.3%), 3 T mpMRI (68/231, 29.4%), 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT (33/231, 14.3%), and prostate biopsy (57/231, 24.7%). Results were considered benign in 130/231 (56.3%), indeterminate in 31/231 (13.4%), and malignant in 70/231 (30.3%). PCa was identified in 51/57 (89.5%) of the men who proceeded to biopsy, including 26/27 (96.3%) men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System scores 4-5 mpMRI and six men with a positive 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT. The most common Gleason score on biopsy was greater than or equal to 4+5 (14/51, 27.5%). 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT was concordant with the 18F-FDG findings in 26/33 (78.8%). All 13 men with a positive concordant 18F-FDG, 3 T mpMRI, and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT had PCa on biopsy. There was no statistically significant difference in the 18F-FDG maximum standardized uptake value between the benign or malignant groups (5.7 vs. 6.1; p=0.580). Conclusion: In this study, after an incidental finding of an avid intraprostatic lesion on 18F-FDG PET/CT, 70 of the 231 cases (30.3%; 0.8% of the entire cohort) had results consistent with PCa, most commonly as Gleason score greater than or equal to 4+5 disease. Unless there is limited life expectancy due to competing medical co-morbidity, men with an incidental finding of intraprostatic uptake on 18F-FDG should be further investigated using principles of PCa detection.

The impact of management option on out-of-pocket costs and perceived financial burden among men with localised prostate cancer in Australia within 6 months of diagnosis.

Objective This study aimed to quantify the out-of-pocket (OOP) costs and perceived financial burden among Australian men with localised prostate cancer in the first 6 months after diagnosis, by primary management option. Methods This cost-analysis quantified OOP costs using administrative claims data and self-reported survey data. Financial burden was assessed using the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) tool. Participants were recruited into a randomised control trial from public or private treatment centres in Victoria and Queensland. Generalised linear models were used to predict OOP costs and COST-FACIT scores. Results Median total OOP costs within 6 months of diagnosis for 256 Australian patients with localised prostate cancer was A$1172 (A$343-2548). Up to 50% of the sample reported A$0 costs for most medical services. Compared with those managed with active surveillance, men having active treatment had 6.4 (95% CI: 3.2-12.7) times greater total OOP costs. Management option, higher Gleason score at diagnosis and having multiple comorbidities were significant predictors of higher OOP costs. Overall high scores on the COST-FACIT indicated low levels of financial burden for the entire sample. Conclusion Largely attributable to being managed with active surveillance, Australian men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer reported relatively low OOP costs and financial burden in the first 6 months post-diagnosis. Together with clinical outcomes, clinicians can use this up to date evidence on costs and perceived financial burdens to assist localised prostate cancer patients and their families make informed decisions about their preferred management option.

The Role of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Primary Staging of Selected Renal Tumours: Initial Experience in a Multicentre Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Accurate primary staging of renal cancer with conventional imaging is challenging. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) may serve to improve the accuracy of renal cancer staging. OBJECTIVE: To determine clinicopathological and management differences for primary renal cancer staged with PSMA PET/CT in comparison to conventional imaging. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of PSMA PET/CT scans performed for primary staging of renal cancer and incidental renal lesions at three sites in Brisbane, Australia between June 2015 and June 2020. Clinical characteristics, imaging, and histopathology were reviewed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Clinicopathological and management differences according to staging modality (PSMA PET/CT, conventional imaging) were assessed. Descriptive statistics were used to report demographics and clinical parameters. Nonparametric methods were used for statistical analysis. Fisher's exact test was used for comparison of small-cell size categorical variables. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: From a total of 120 PSMA PET/CT scans, 61 were included (52 staging, 9 incidental) for predominantly males (74%) with a mean age of 65.1 yr (standard deviation 12.0). Most primary lesions (40/51) were clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC; 98% PSMA-avid), eight were non-ccRCC (75% PSMA-avid), and three were non-RCC (oncocytoma; 67% PSMA-avid). PSMA PET identified a greater number of presumed metastatic lesions than conventional imaging (195 vs 160). A management change was observed for 32% of patients (20% major, 12% minor). Limitations include the retrospective design and selection bias, lack of blinding to PSMA reporting, and the use of different PSMA radiotracers. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA PET/CT detected more metastases than conventional imaging and most renal cancers were PSMA-avid, resulting in a management change for one-third of the patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at a newer type of scan called PSMA PET/CT for first staging of kidney cancer. We found that this detects more metastasis and helps in decisions on changes in treatment for some patients. This type of imaging is a useful addition to conventional scans in tricky cases and may help in better selection of suitable treatments, but more studies are required.

Reproducibility and Accuracy of the PRIMARY Score on PSMA PET and of PI-RADS on Multiparametric MRI for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis Within a Real-World Database.

The PRIMARY score is a 5-category scale developed to identify clinically significant intraprostate malignancy (csPCa) on 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-11 PET/CT (68Ga-PSMA PET) using a combination of anatomic site, pattern, and intensity. Developed within the PRIMARY trial, the score requires evaluation in external datasets. This study aimed to assess the reproducibility and diagnostic accuracy of the PRIMARY score in a cohort of patients who underwent multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and 68Ga-PSMA PET before prostate biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods: In total, data from 242 men who had undergone 68Ga-PSMA PET and mpMRI before transperineal prostate biopsy were available for this ethics-approved retrospective study. 68Ga-PSMA PET and mpMRI data were centrally collated in a cloud-based deidentified image database. Six experienced prostate-focused nuclear medicine specialists were trained (1 h) in applying the PRIMARY score with 30 sample images. Six radiologists experienced in prostate mpMRI read images as per the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), version 2.1. All images were read (with masking of clinical information) at least twice, with discordant findings sent to a masked third (or fourth) reader as necessary. Cohen κ was determined for both imaging scales as 5 categories and then collapsed to binary (negative and positive) categories (score 1 or 2 vs. 3, 4, or 5). Diagnostic performance parameters were calculated, with an International Society of Urological Pathology grade group of at least 2 (csPCa) on biopsy defined as the gold standard. Combined-imaging-positive results were defined as any PI-RADS score of 4 or 5 or as a PI-RADS score of 1-3 with a PRIMARY score of 3-5. Results: In total, 227 patients with histopathology, 68Ga-PSMA PET, and mpMRI imaging before prostate biopsy were included; 33% had no csPCa, and 67% had csPCa. Overall interrater reliability was higher for the PRIMARY scale (κ = 0.70) than for PI-RADS (κ = 0.58) when assessed as a binary category (benign vs. malignant). This was similar for all 5 categories (κ = 0.65 vs. 0.48). Diagnostic performance to detect csPCa was comparable between PSMA PET and mpMRI (sensitivity, 86% vs. 89%; specificity, 76% vs. 74%; positive predictive value, 88% vs. 88%; negative predictive value, 72% vs. 76%). Using combined imaging, sensitivity was 94%, specificity was 68%, positive predictive value was 86%, and negative predictive value was 85%. Conclusion: The PRIMARY score applied by first-user nuclear medicine specialists showed substantial interrater reproducibility, exceeding that of PI-RADS applied by mpMRI-experienced radiologists. Diagnostic performance was similar between the 2 modalities. The PRIMARY score should be considered when interpreting intraprostatic PSMA PET images.

Gleason score 3+3=6 prostatic adenocarcinoma is not benign and the current debate is unhelpful to clinicians and patients.

Prostate adenocarcinoma is a common malignancy associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. In both prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens Gleason scoring informs both treatment and outcome prediction. The current convention is that in needle biopsies, Gleason patterns 3, 4 and 5 are considered to be malignant. Despite this there is debate as to whether or not Gleason score (GS) 3+3=6 should be diagnosed as cancer due to potential over-treatment and the psychological impact on patients. It is apparent that GS 3+3=6 is indolent disease with a low risk of metastasis. However, it does have the histological features of malignancy and is capable of infiltrating the prostate gland, extraprostatic extension, and metastatic spread. Furthermore GS 3+3=6 carcinoma has immunohistochemical and molecular genetic features similar to those of higher grade prostatic carcinoma. If GS 3+3=6 tumour is considered benign, the question arises should a benign label be given to the Gleason pattern 3 component of tumour that includes Gleason patterns of higher grade? This would seem a logical step as GS 3+3=6 cancers and the pattern 3 component in cancers with multiple patterns are morphologically identical. If pattern 3 is considered to be benign, then Gleason scoring would be limited to 4+4=8, 4+5=9, 5+4=9 and 5+5=10 which is clearly inappropriate. The correct strategy to address potential over-treatment of patients with low-grade cancer is clinician and patient education, not the recalibration of Gleason grading to reclassify malignant tumours as benign.

68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT in addition to mpMRI in men undergoing biopsy during active surveillance for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer: study protocol for a prospective cross-sectional study.

Background: In active surveillance there is significant interest in whether imaging modalities such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) or 68Gallium prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT) can improve the detection of progression to clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and thus reduce the frequency of prostate biopsies and associated morbidity. Recent studies have demonstrated the value of mpMRI in active surveillance; however, mpMRI does miss a proportion of disease progression and thus alone cannot replace biopsy. To date, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) has shown additive value to mpMRI in its ability to detect prostate cancer (PCa) in the primary diagnostic setting. Our objective is to evaluate the diagnostic utility of PSMA-PET to detect progression to csPCa in active surveillance patients. Methods: We will perform a prospective, cross-sectional, partially blinded, multicentre clinical trial evaluating the additive value of PSMA-PET with mpMRI against saturation transperineal template prostate biopsy. Two hundred and twenty-five men will be recruited who have newly diagnosed PCa which is suitable for active surveillance. Following enrolment, patients will undergo a PSMA-PET and mpMRI within 3 months of a repeat 12-month confirmatory biopsy. Patients who remain on active surveillance after confirmatory biopsy will then be planned to have a further mpMRI and PSMA-PET prior to a repeat biopsy in 3-4 years. The primary outcome is to assess the ability of PSMA-PET to detect or exclude significant malignancy on repeat biopsy. Secondary outcomes include (I) assess the comparative diagnostic accuracies of mpMRI and PSMA-PET alone [sensitivity/specificity/negative predictive value (NPV)/positive predictive value (PPV)] to detect progression on biopsy based on predefined histologic criteria for progression; (II) comparison of index lesion identification by template biopsies vs. MRI targeted lesions vs. PSMA targeted lesions; (III) evaluation of concordance of lesions identified on final histopathology and each imaging modality (PSMA-PET and/or mpMRI) in the subset of patients proceeding to RP. Discussion: The results of this trial will define the role of PSMA-PET in active surveillance and potentially reduce the number of biopsies needed to detect progression to csPCa. Trial Registration: The current trial was registered with the ANZCTR on the 3/2/2022 with the trial ID ACTRN12622000188730, it is accessible at https://www.anzctr.org.au/.

Clinical impact of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography (PET) on intensification or deintensification of advanced renal cell carcinoma management.

PURPOSE: There is an emerging role of the use of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in renal cell carcinoma. Herein, we report our experience in use of PSMA PET in recurrent or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent PSMA PET for suspected recurrent or de-novo metastatic RCC between 2015 and 2020 at three institutions was performed. The primary outcome was change in management (intensification or de-intensification) following PSMA PET scan. Secondary outcomes included histopathological correlation of PSMA avid sites, comparison of sites of disease on PSMA PET to diagnostic CT and time to systemic treatment.

Uro-symphyseal Fistula: A Systematic Review to Inform a Contemporary, Evidence-based Management Framework.

OBJECTIVE: To collate available data via systematic review considering etiology, presentation, and treatment of Uro-Symphyseal Fistula (USF) in order to inform a contemporary management framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021232954). MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched for manuscripts considering USF published between 2000 and 2022. Full text manuscripts were reviewed for clinical data. Univariate statistical analysis was performed where possible. RESULTS: A total of 31 manuscripts, comprising 248 USF cases, met inclusion criteria. Suprapubic pain and difficulty ambulating were common symptoms. MRI confirmed the diagnosis in 95% of cases. Radiotherapy for prostate cancer was the most common predisposing factor (93%). Among these patients, prior endoscopic bladder outlet surgery was common (83%; bladder neck incision/urethral dilatation n = 59, TURP/GLL PVP n = 34). In those with prior prostatic radiation, conservative management failed in 96% of cases. Cystectomy with urinary diversion (86% n = 184) was favored over bladder-sparing techniques (14% (n = 30) after prior radiation. In radiation naïve patients, conservative management failed in 72% of patients, resulting in either open fistula repair with flap (62%) or radical prostatectomy (28%). CONCLUSION: Prior radiotherapy is a significant risk factor for USF and almost always requires definitive major surgery (debridement, cystectomy, and urinary diversion). On the basis of the findings within this systematic review, we present management principles that may assist clinicians with these complex cases. Further research into pathogenesis, prevention, and optimal treatment approach is required.

Development and External Validation of a Novel Nomogram to Predict the Probability of Pelvic Lymph-node Metastases in Prostate Cancer Patients Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Molecular Imaging with Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative assessment of the probability of pelvic lymph-node metastatic disease (pN1) is required to identify patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who are candidates for extended pelvic lymph-node dissection (ePLND). OBJECTIVE: To develop a novel intuitive prognostic nomogram for predicting pathological lymph-node (pN) status in contemporary patients with primary diagnosed localized PCa, using preoperative clinical and histopathological parameters, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In total, 700 eligible patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and ePLND were included in the model-building cohort. The external validation cohort consisted of 305 surgically treated patients. Logistic regression with backward elimination was used to select variables for the Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Performance of the final model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision-curve analyses. Models were subsequently validated in an external population. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram included initial prostate-specific antigen value, MRI T stage, highest biopsy grade group (GG), biopsy technique, percentage of systematic cores with clinically significant PCa (GG ≥2), and lymph-node status on PSMA-PET. The AUC for predicting pN status was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.85) for the final model. On external validation, the Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram showed superior discriminative ability to the Briganti-2017 and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) nomograms (AUC 0.75 [95% CI 0.69-0.81] vs 0.67 [95% CI 0.61-0.74] and 0.65 [95% CI 0.58-0.72], respectively; p < 0.05), and similar discriminative ability to the Briganti-2019 nomogram (AUC 0.78 [95% CI 0.71-0.86] vs 0.80 [95% CI 0.73-0.86]; p = 0.76). The Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram showed excellent calibration on external validation, with an increased net benefit at a threshold probability of ≥4%. CONCLUSIONS: The validated Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram performs superior to the Briganti-2017 and MSKCC nomograms, and similar to the Briganti-2019 nomogram. Furthermore, it is applicable in all patients with newly diagnosed unfavorable intermediate- and high-risk PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: We developed and validated the Amsterdam-Brisbane-Sydney nomogram for the prediction of prostate cancer spread to lymph nodes before surgery. This nomogram performs similar or superior to all presently available nomograms.

Clinicopathologic Significance of Anterior Prostate Cancer: Comparison With Posterior Prostate Cancer in the Era of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Anterior prostate cancer (APC) has been considered an indolent tumor, most commonly arising in the transition zone (TZ). More recently, detection of APC has been facilitated through multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and improved biopsy techniques, enabling earlier detection. The pathologic features and clinical significance of pure APC in a large contemporary series of well-characterized tumors have, to date, not been elucidated. Cases with APC defined as cancer present anterior to the urethra only were identified from 1761 consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens accessioned between January 2015 and August 2016. The clinicopathologic features of these cases were compared with those of pure posterior prostate cancer (PPC) and the features of anterior peripheral zone (APZ) cancers were compared with those of TZ cancers. In addition, the tumor series from 2015 to 2016 was compared with a cohort of 1054 patients accessioned before the utilization of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the routine workup of patients with prostate cancer. In the 2015-2016 series, there were 188 (10.7%) patients with APC compared with 5.4% in the series from the pre-multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging era. No difference was observed between APC and PPC with regards to patient age or mean serum prostate-specific antigen at presentation. Mean tumor volume and positive surgical margin (PSM) rates were significantly higher in APC. In contrast, PPC was more commonly high grade with more frequent extraprostatic extension (EPE). None of the cases of APC had infiltration of the seminal vesicle or lymph node involvement, in contrast to PPC, with almost 14% of cases in each category. The 3- and 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was significantly higher in APC when compared with PPC, although this was not retained on multivariable analysis which included tumor location. On division of APCs according to anatomic zone of origin, 45% were APZ cancer and 37% TZ cancer. On comparison of APZ and TZ cancers, there were no significant differences in mean age and serum prostate-specific antigen at presentation as well as tumor volume, Gleason score, and PSM rate. High-grade malignancy (Gleason score >3 + 4=7) was seen in 26% of TZ cancers which compared with 44% of APZ cancers and 56% of PPC cancers. The rate of EPE was significantly higher in APZ when compared with TZ cancer ( P< 0.0005); however, the biochemical recurrence rate was not significantly different between the groups. The prevalence of APC in radical prostatectomy specimens has increased in recent times, in association with earlier detection at a stage amenable to curative surgical treatment. APC, when compared with PPC, is less commonly high grade with less frequent EPE, despite the APC group having larger tumors and a higher PSM rate at presentation. However, not all anterior cancers are indolent. Anterior cancers are more commonly seen in the APZ than the TZ and APZ cancers appear more locally aggressive than TZ cancers.

Guidelines of guidelines: focal therapy for prostate cancer, is it time for consensus?

OBJECTIVE: To provide a summary and discussion of international guidelines, position statements and consensus statements in relation to focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: The European Association of Urology-European Association of Nuclear Medicine-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology-European Society of Urogential Radiology-International Society of Urological Pathology-International Society of Geriatric Oncology and American Urological Association-American Society for Radiation Oncology-Society of Urologic Oncology guidelines were interrogated for recommendations for FT. PubMed and Ovid Medline were searched for consensus statements. Only studies in English since 2015 were included. Reference lists of the included articles were also interrogated and a manual search for studies was also performed. RESULTS: Our results showed a lack of long-term randomised data for FT. International Urological guidelines emphasised the need for more high-quality clinical trials with robust oncological and toxicity outcomes. Consensus and positions statements were heterogenous. CONCLUSION: A globally accepted guideline for FT planning, technique and follow-up are still yet to be determined. Well-designed studies with long-term follow-up and robust clinical and toxicity endpoints are needed to improve our understanding of FT and create uniform guidelines to streamline management and follow-up.

LOT and HOT or not. The proliferation of clinically insignificant and poorly characterised types of renal neoplasia.

The classification of malignant tumours is influenced by both immunohistochemical and molecular genetic findings. This is highlighted in the latest World Health Organization classification of renal neoplasia, which has a tumour category of 'tumours that are molecularly defined'. This implies that the defining molecular features are integral to tumourigenesis, which may not necessarily be the case. Renal oncocytoma is recognised as a benign tumour with variable morphology and immunoexpression. A variant of these tumours is hybrid oncocytic chromophobe tumour, which has features of both oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and may, on rare occasions, show malignant behaviour. Recent reports have proposed two further entities with eosinophilic cytoplasm and varying nuclear pleomorphism, designated low grade oncocytic tumour (LOT) and eosinophilic vacuolated tumour (EVT), formally known as high grade oncocytic tumour (HOT). The diagnosis of these apparently benign tumours was made on the basis of morphological and immunohistochemical features. More recently it has been claimed that the mutations in the mTOR pathway are also a diagnostic feature and it is further suggested that these mutations are key to the pathogenesis of these tumours. As is seen in oncocytoma, immunohistochemical expression of tumours included in series of LOT and EVT is variable. The mutations in the mTOR pathway, where detected, were not constant, with any combination of mTOR, TSC1 and/or TSC2 being involved. A major issue is that in many of the studies full comparative genomic hybridisation results are not presented. In addition it is well recognised that mTOR mutations are seen in a variety of renal tumours. In view of these conflicting results, the rarity of these tumours and their apparent benign nature, raises questions as to why these tumours should be considered specific entities.

Corrigendum: Correction of the Abstract. Focal therapy for prostate cancer with irreversible electroporation: Oncological and functional results of a single institution study.

This corrects the article on p. 285 in vol. 63, PMID: 35534217.

Oncological and urinary outcomes following low-dose-rate brachytherapy with a median follow-up of 11.8 years.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the long-term oncological outcomes and urological morbidity of low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (LDRBT) monotherapy using live intraoperative dosimetry planning and an automated needle navigation delivery system for the treatment of men with low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective database of 400 consecutive patients who underwent LDRBT between July 2003 and June 2015 was retrospectively reviewed to assess urinary side-effects and biochemical progression, based on the Phoenix definition and also a definition of a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≥0.2 µg/L. RESULTS: Minimum patient follow-up was 5.5 years. The median follow-up of the entire cohort was 11.8 years. The median (range) PSA level was 6.1 (0.9-17) µg/L and the median Gleason score was 3 + 4. The biochemical relapse-free survival (RFS; freedom from biochemical recurrence) based on the Phoenix definition was 85.8% (343/400). The RFS using a 'surgical' definition of a PSA level of <0.2 µg/L was 71% (284/400). Of the 297 men followed for ≥10 years, prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) was 98% (291/297). Post-LDRBT urethral stricture developed in 11 men (2.8%, 11/400). For men with ≥10 years of follow-up, 22 men (7.4%, 22/297) required a pad for either stress or urge urinary incontinence (UI). UI was identified in only 2.2% (one of 46) of men who had a bladder neck incision (BNI) before LDRBT. CONCLUSION: LDRBT is associated with excellent PCSS, with a median follow-up of 11.8 years. The risk of post-implantation urethral stricture and UI is low and a pre-implantation BNI for management of bladder outflow obstruction does not increase the risk of UI or urethral stricture.