The current role of local treatment in metastatic prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the current role of local treatment in prostate cancer with a low metastatic burden (or oligometastatic) in relation to survival and safety. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of studies published in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases until December 2021. Studies comparing local and nonlocal treatment in patients with metastatic prostate cancer were included. The risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Oligo-metastasis was defined as low-volume metastasis with up to five lesions. The local treatment used was radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy associated with systemic therapy (i.e., androgen deprivation therapy ± abiraterone, docetaxel, enzalutamide, or apalutamide). The endpoints evaluated were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, failure-free survival, and complication rates. RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 46,541 patients were included. The 5-year overall survival (16.0% vs. 6.5%, respectively; odds ratio (OR) 2.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.18, 3.44; I2 = 0%; p < .00001) and 3-year cancer-specific survival (48.2% vs. 26.3%, respectively; OR 1.87; 95% CI: 1.44, 2.44; I2 = 0%; p < .00001) were higher in the local treatment group than that of the nonlocal treatment group. In addition, failure-free survival at 3 years was higher in the local treatment group than that of the nonlocal treatment group (40.5% vs. 28.4%, respectively; OR 1.72; 95% CI, 1.38, 2.14; I2 = 0%; p < .00001). The low complication rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 indicated that local treatment is feasible and safe in this setting. CONCLUSION: Recent data have shown that local treatment combined with systematic therapy, might improve the overall, cancer-specific, and failure-free survivals of patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. Furthermore, local treatment is both feasible and safe. Further studies evaluating the quality of life of these patients are needed.

A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing two doses of AbobotulinumtoxinA for idiopathic overactive bladder.

AIMS: To compare 300 U versus 500 U of abobotulinumtoxinA (ABO) intravesical injections for the treatment of idiopathic overactive bladder (OAB) refractory to first and second-line treatments. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single blind study was performed in female patients with symptoms of OAB, who had failed conservative treatment. Patients were treated with 300 or 500 U of ABO injected into 30 sites, avoiding the trigone. All treatments were evaluated by voiding diary, ICIQ-OAB questionnaire, urodynamic test, visual analogue scale (VAS) for treatment satisfaction and patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I). The primary outcome was change in maximum cistometric capacity (MCC). Secondary outcome included changes in urgency, complete continence, subjective success (VAS and PGI-I), and adverse events (urinary retention, UTI, and CIC). RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included. MCC has increased from 185.0 to 270.9 mL (300 U) and from 240.8 to 311.7 mL (500 U), comparing the baseline with 12 weeks, without statistical difference between the groups (P = 0.270). At 12 weeks, 91% of patients were dry in both groups. At 24 weeks, episodes of incontinence had returned in 50% (300 U) and 0% (500 U) (P = 0.013). Patients were better or much better (PGI-I) in70% (300 U) and 88.9% (500 U) at 12 w; and 50% (300 U) and 100% (500 U), at 24 w (P = 0.027). The peak of PVR was at 4 w, being 71.7 mL (300 U) and 96.5 mL (500 U). General UTI incidence was 35.7%. One patient (500 U) required CIC for 2 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Intravesical ABO injection at 500 U improves symptoms and quality of life for longer period of time than 300 U for idiopathic OAB.