Management of advanced prostate cancer in the Asia-Pacific region: Summary of the Asia-Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2023.

AIM: The aim of the third Asia-Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APAC APCCC 2023) was to discuss the application in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region of consensus statements from the 4th Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022). METHODS: The one-day meeting in July 2023 brought together 27 experts from 14 APAC countries. The meeting covered five topics: (1) Intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer; (2) Management of newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; (3) Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; (4) Homologous recombination repair mutation testing; (5) Management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Pre- and post-symposium polling gathered APAC-specific responses to APCCC consensus questions and insights on current practices and challenges in the APAC region. RESULTS: APAC APCCC highlights APAC-specific considerations in an evolving landscape of diagnostic technologies and treatment innovations for advanced prostate cancer. While new technologies are available in the region, cost and reimbursement continue to influence practice significantly. Individual patient considerations, including the impact of chemophobia on Asian patients, also influence decision-making. CONCLUSION: The use of next-generation imaging, genetic testing, and new treatment combinations is increasing the complexity and duration of prostate cancer management. Familiarity with new diagnostic and treatment options is growing in the APAC region. Insights highlight the continued importance of a multidisciplinary approach that includes nuclear medicine, genetic counseling, and quality-of-life expertise. The APAC APCCC meeting provides an important opportunity to share practice and identify APAC-specific issues and considerations in areas of low evidence where clinical experience is growing.

Prostate cancer management in Southeast Asian countries: a survey of clinical practice patterns.

Background: Prostate cancer (PC) has a serious public health impact, and its incidence is rising due to the aging population. There is limited evidence and consensus to guide the management of PC in Southeast Asia (SEA). We present real-world data on clinical practice patterns in SEA for advanced PC care. Method: A paper-based survey was used to identify clinical practice patterns and obtain consensus among the panelists. The survey included the demographics of the panelists, the use of clinical guidelines, and clinical practice patterns in the management of advanced PC in SEA. Results: Most panelists (81%) voted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as the most effective test for early PC diagnosis and risk stratification. Nearly 44% of panelists agreed that prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography imaging for PC diagnostic and staging information aids local and systemic therapy decisions. The majority of the panel preferred abiraterone acetate (67%) or docetaxel (44%) as first-line therapy for symptomatic mCRPC patients. Abiraterone acetate (50%) is preferred over docetaxel as a first-line treatment in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer patients with high-volume disease. However, the panel did not support the use of abiraterone acetate in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients. Apalutamide (75%) is the preferred treatment option for patients with nmCRPC. The cost and availability of modern treatments and technologies are important factors influencing therapeutic decisions. All panelists supported the use of generic versions of approved therapies. Conclusion: The survey results reflect real-world management of advanced PC in a SEA country. These findings could be used to guide local clinical practices and highlight the financial challenges of modern healthcare.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.

BACKGROUND: Nephrolithiasis is a common urological disease worldwide. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been used for the treatment of renal stones since the 1980s, while retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are newer, more invasive treatment modalities that may have higher stone-free rates. The complications of RIRS and PCNL have decreased owing to improvement in surgical techniques and instruments. We re-evaluated the best evidence on this topic in an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy compared with percutaneous nephrolithotomy or retrograde intrarenal surgery for treating kidney stones. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov with no restrictions on language or publication status. The latest search date was 6 December 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared ESWL with PCNL or RIRS for kidney stone treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Our primary outcomes were treatment success rate at three months (defined as residual fragments smaller than 4 mm, or as defined by the study authors), quality of life (QoL), and complications. Our secondary outcomes were retreatment rate, auxiliary procedures rate, and duration of hospital stay. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and independently rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 31 trials involving 3361 participants (3060 participants completed follow-up). Four trials were only available as an abstract. Overall mean age was 46.6 years and overall mean stone size was 13.4 mm. Most participants (93.8%) had kidney stones measuring 20 mm or less, and 68.9% had lower pole stones. ESWL versus PCNL ESWL may have a lower three-month treatment success rate than PCNL (risk ratio [RR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57 to 0.79; I2 = 87%; 12 studies, 1303 participants; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 304 fewer participants per 1000 (397 fewer to 194 fewer) reporting treatment success with ESWL. ESWL may have little or no effect on QoL after treatment compared with PCNL (1 study, 78 participants; low-certainty evidence). ESWL probably leads to fewer complications than PCNL (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82; I2 = 18%; 13 studies, 1385 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 82 fewer participants per 1000 (115 fewer to 39 fewer) having complications after ESWL. ESWL versus RIRS ESWL may have a lower three-month treatment success rate than RIRS (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.93; I2 = 63%; 13 studies, 1349 participants; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 127 fewer participants per 1000 (186 fewer to 59 fewer) reporting treatment success with ESWL. We are very uncertain about QoL after treatment; the evidence is based on three studies (214 participants) that we were unable to pool. We are very uncertain about the difference in complication rates between ESWL and RIRS (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.36; I2 = 32%; 13 studies, 1305 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to nine fewer participants per 1000 (49 fewer to 48 more) having complications after ESWL. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ESWL compared with PCNL may have lower three-month success rates, may have a similar effect on QoL, and probably leads to fewer complications. ESWL compared with RIRS may have lower three-month success rates, but the evidence on QoL outcomes and complication rates is very uncertain. These findings should provide valuable information to aid shared decision-making between clinicians and people with kidney stones who are undecided about these three options.

Managing advanced prostate cancer in the Asia Pacific region: "Real-world" application of Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019 statements.

AIM: The second Asia-Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APAC APCCC 2020) gathered insights into the real-world application in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region of consensus statements from the 3rd Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2019). METHODS: The 4-h our virtual meeting in October 2020 brought together 26 experts from 14 APAC countries to discuss APCCC 2019 recommendations. Presentations were prerecorded and viewed prior to the meeting. A postmeeting survey gathered views on current practice. RESULTS: The meeting and survey highlighted several developments since APAC APCCC 2018. Increased access and use in the region of PSMA PET/CT imaging is providing additional diagnostic and staging information for advanced prostate cancer and influencing local and systemic therapy choices. Awareness of oligometastatic disease, although not clearly defined, is increasing. Novel androgen receptor pathway antagonists are expanding treatment options. Cost and access to contemporary treatments and technologies continue to be a significant factor influencing therapeutic decisions in the region. With treatment options increasing, multidisciplinary treatment planning, shared decision making, and informed choice remain critical. A discussion on the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted challenges for diagnosis, treatment, and clinical trials and new service delivery models that will continue beyond the pandemic. CONCLUSION: APAC-specific prostate cancer research and data are important to ensure that treatment guidelines and recommendations reflect local populations and resources. Facilitated approaches to collaboration across the region such as that achieved through APAC APCCC meetings continue to be a valuable mechanism to ensure the relevance of consensus guidelines within the region.

Clinical outcomes of abiraterone acetate and predictors of its treatment duration in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Real-world experience in the Southeast Asian cohort.

It is of much interest to understand the efficacy of abiraterone acetate (AA) in routine clinical practice. We assessed the clinical outcome of AA in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and determined clinical factors associated with AA treatment duration in real-world setting. This real-world cohort consisted of 93 patients with mCRPC treated with AA in Thailand (58.1%) and Malaysia (41.9%). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS). Secondary endpoints were predictors associated with AA treatment duration evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression. Around 74% were chemotherapy-naïve. The median AA treatment duration was 10 months (IQR 5.6-17.1). Malaysians had a relatively lower median OS and bPFS (OS 17.8 months; 95% CI 6.4-29.1, bPFS 10.4 months; 95% CI 8.8-12.0) compared to Thais (OS 27.0 months; 95% CI 11.3-42.7, bPFS 14.0 months; 95% CI 5.8-22.2), although it did not achieve statistical significance (P > .05). Patients with longer AA treatment duration (>10 months) had lower risk of death and longer bPFS, compared to those with shorter AA treatment duration (≤10 months) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.10, 95% CI 0.05-0.22 and HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.06-0.25, respectively). Multivariable analysis showed that PSA at AA initiation, presence of PSA response and chemotherapy-naive were independently associated with AA duration (P < .05). Abiraterone acetate is well-tolerated in the Southeast Asian cohort with comparable survival benefits to other Asian populations in real-world setting. Lower PSA levels at AA initiation, presence of PSA response, and chemotherapy-naive were significant in determining AA treatment duration.

United in Fight against prOstate cancer (UFO) registry: first results from a large, multi-centre, prospective, longitudinal cohort study of advanced prostate cancer in Asia.

OBJECTIVES: To document the management of advanced prostate cancer including diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and care, in real-world practice in Asia using the United in Fight against prOstate cancer (UFO) registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We established a multi-national, longitudinal, observational registry of patients with prostate cancer presenting to participating tertiary care hospitals in eight Asian countries. A total of 3636 eligible patients with existing or newly diagnosed high-risk localised prostate cancer (HRL), non-metastatic biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (M0), or metastatic prostate cancer (M1), were consecutively enrolled and are being followed-up for 5 years. Patient history, demographic and disease characteristics, treatment and treatment decisions, were collected at first prostate cancer diagnosis and at enrolment. Patient-reported quality of life was prospectively assessed using the European Quality of Life-five Dimensions, five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Prostate Cancer questionnaires. In the present study, we report the first interim analysis of 2063 patients enrolled from study start (15 September 2015) until 18 May 2017. RESULTS: Of the 2063 enrolled patients, 357 (17%), 378 (19%), and 1328 (64%) had HRL, M0 or M1 prostate cancer, respectively. The mean age at first diagnosis was similar in each group, 56% of all patients had extracapsular extension of their tumour, 28% had regional lymph node metastasis, and 53% had distant metastases. At enrolment, 62% of patients had at least one co-morbidity (mainly cardiovascular disease or diabetes), 91.8% of M1 patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of <2 and the mean EQ-5D-5L visual analogue score was 74.6-79.6 across cohorts. Treatment of M1 patients was primarily with combined androgen blockade (58%) or androgen-deprivation therapy (either orchidectomy or luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogues) (32%). Decisions to start therapy were mainly driven by treatment guidelines and disease progression. Decision to discontinue therapy was most often due to disease progression (hormonal drug therapy) or completion of therapy (chemotherapy). CONCLUSION: In the UFO registry of advanced prostate cancer in Asia, regional differences exist in prostate cancer treatment patterns that will be explored more deeply during the follow-up period; prospective follow-up is ongoing. The UFO registry will provide valuable descriptive data on current disease characteristics and treatment landscape amongst patients with prostate cancer in Asia.

Report of the third Asian Prostate Cancer study meeting.

The Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP) study is an Asia-wide initiative that was launched in December 2015 in Tokyo, Japan, with the objective of surveying information about patients who have received a histopathological diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and are undergoing treatment and clarifying distribution of staging, the actual status of treatment choices, and treatment outcomes. The study aims to clarify the clinical situation for PCa in Asia and use the outcomes for the purposes of international comparison. Following the first meeting in Tokyo in December 2015, the second A-CaP meeting was held in Seoul, Korea, in September 2016. This, the third A-CaP meeting, was held on October 14, 2017, in Chiang Mai, Thailand, with the participation of members and collaborators from 12 countries and regions. In the meeting, participating countries and regions presented the current status of data collection, and the A-CaP office presented a preliminary analysis of the registered cases received from each country and region. Participants discussed ongoing challenges relating to data input and collection, institutional, and legislative issues that may present barriers to data sharing, and the outlook for further patient registrations through to the end of the registration period in December 2018. In addition to A-CaP-specific discussions, a series of special lectures were also delivered on the situation for health insurance in the United States, the correlation between insurance coverage and PCa outcomes, and the outlook for robotic surgery in the Asia-Pacific region. Members also confirmed the principles of authorship in collaborative studies, with a view to publishing original articles based on A-CaP data in the future.

Telomerase Inhibition, Telomere Shortening, and Cellular Uptake of the Perylene Derivatives PM2 and PIPER in Prostate Cancer Cells.

Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer among men worldwide, and it is ranked first in the United States and Europe. Since prostate cancer is slow-growing, active surveillance for low-risk cancer has been increasingly supported by various guidelines. Most prostate cancers reactivate telomerase to circumvent the replicative senescence caused by the end replication problem; therefore, telomerase inhibition is potentially useful for the suppression of prostate cancer progression during this active surveillance or for the prevention of cancer recurrence after conventional therapies. In this study, we demonstrated that the perylene derivatives, PM2 and PIPER, could suppress human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) expression and telomerase activity in the short-term treatment of androgen-dependent prostate cancer cell line LNCaP and the androgen-independent prostate cancer cell line PC3 prostate cancer cells. Long-term treatment with subcytotoxic doses of these compounds in both prostate cancer cells showed telomere shortening and a significant increase in senescent cells. Although the acute cytotoxicity of PM2 was about 30 times higher than that of PIPER in both prostate cancer cells, the cellular uptake of both compounds was comparable as determined by flow cytometry and fluorescent microscopy.

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer in the Asia Pacific region: 'real-world' consideration of results from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017.

OBJECTIVE: The Asia Pacific Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APAC APCCC 2018) brought together 20 experts from 15 APAC countries to discuss the real-world application of consensus statements from the second APCCC held in St Gallen in 2017 (APCCC 2017). FINDINGS: Differences in genetics, environment, lifestyle, diet and culture are all likely to influence the management of advanced prostate cancer in the APAC region when compared with the rest of the world. When considering the strong APCCC 2017 recommendation for the use of upfront docetaxel in metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer, the panel noted possible increased toxicity in Asian men receiving docetaxel, which would affect this recommendation in the APAC region. Although androgen receptor-targeting agents appear to be well tolerated in Asian men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, access to these drugs is very limited for financial reasons across the region. The meeting highlighted that cost and access to contemporary treatments and technologies are key factors influencing therapeutic decision-making in the APAC region. Whilst lower cost/older treatments and technologies may be an option, issues of culture and patient or physician preference mean, these may not always be acceptable. Although generic products can reduce cost in some countries, costs may still be prohibitive for lower-income patients or communities. The panellists noted the opportunity for a coordinated approach across the APAC region to address issues of access and cost. Developments in technologies and treatments are presenting new opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Differences in genetics and epidemiology affect the side-effect profiles of some drugs and influence prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: As the field continues to evolve, collaboration across the APAC region will be important to facilitate relevant research and collection and appraisal of data relevant to APAC populations. In the meantime, the APAC APCCC 2018 meeting highlighted the critical importance of a multidisciplinary team-based approach to treatment planning and care, delivery of best-practice care by clinicians with appropriate expertise, and the importance of patient information and support for informed patient choice.

Prospective performance of the Prostate Health Index in prostate cancer detection in the first prostate biopsy of men with a total prostatic specific antigen of 4-10 ng/mL and negative digital rectal examination.

BACKGROUND: The disadvantage of using total serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA) test for detection of prostate cancer is that it has a low specificity. The low specificity of total PSA (tPSA) test leads to unnecessary prostate biopsies. In this prospective study, we assessed the serum tPSA, free PSA, p2PSA, and the Prostate Health Index (PHI) in the detection of prostate cancer in men with a tPSA of 4-10 ng/mL and a negative digital rectal examination (DRE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 101 male outpatients with a serum PSA of 4-10 ng/mL and nonsuspicious DRE for prostate cancer who underwent first transrectal ultrasound with a prostate biopsy were recruited. A blood sample to enable tPSA, free PSA, and p2PSA levels to be calculated was drawn before the prostate biopsy. The diagnosis and detection of high-grade cancer are correlated with the blood sample. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were positive for prostate cancer. All had significantly higher serum 2pPSA and PHI levels than patients with no cancer. A PHI level at 90% sensitivity (cutoff of 34.14) demonstrated a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and more specificity in diagnosis and detection of high-grade prostate cancer than other tests. CONCLUSIONS: The PHI in men with a PSA level of 4-10 ng/mL with negative DRE increased specificity in the detection of prostate cancer. This test is useful in discriminating between patients with or without cancer and also enables the detection of high-grade cancer avoiding unnecessary biopsies.

Report of the Second Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP) Study Meeting.

The Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP) Study is an Asia-wide initiative that has been developed over the course of 2 years. The study was launched in December 2015 in Tokyo, Japan, and the participating countries and regions engaged in preparations for the study during the course of 2016, including patient registration and creation of databases for the purpose of the study. The Second A-CaP Meeting was held on September 8, 2016 in Seoul, Korea, with the participation of members and collaborators from 12 countries and regions. Under the study, each participating country or region will begin registration of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients and conduct prognostic investigations. From the data gathered, common research themes will be identified, such as comparisons among Asian countries of background factors in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. This is the first Asia-wide study of prostate cancer and has developed from single country research efforts in this field, including in Japan and Korea. At the Second Meeting, participating countries and regions discussed the status of preparations and discussed various issues that are being faced. These issues include technical challenges in creating databases, promoting participation in each country or region, clarifying issues relating to data input, addressing institutional issues such as institutional review board requirements, and the need for dedicated data managers. The meeting was positioned as an opportunity to share information and address outstanding issues prior to the initiation of the study. In addition to A-CaP-specific discussions, a series of special lectures was also delivered as a means of providing international perspectives on the latest developments in prostate cancer and the use of databases and registration studies around the world.

Management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Insights from urology experts in Thailand.

Treatment options for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) are available, but clear instructions for the selection of appropriate treatment are lacking. A meeting of urology experts based in Thailand was convened with the following objectives: (1) to reach a consensus and share real-life experiences about how to identify CRPC; (2) to choose the appropriate treatment for CRPC patients; (3) to evaluate disease progression using novel inhibitors of the androgen receptor pathway; (4) to identify the frequency of monitoring disease; and (5) to promote rational use of corticosteroids in CRPC patients. This consensus document can provide guidance to other urologists in Thailand to provide appropriate treatment to metastatic CRPC patients in a timely manner.

Asia prostate cancer study (A-CaP Study) launch symposium.

The Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP) Study is an Asia-wide initiative that has been developed over the course of 2 years. The A-CaP Study is scheduled to begin in 2016, when each participating country or region will begin registration of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients and conduct prognosis investigations. From the data gathered, common research themes will be identified, such as comparisons among Asian countries of background factors in newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients. This is the first Asia-wide study of prostate cancer and has developed from single country research efforts in this field, including in Japan and Korea. The inaugural Board Meeting of A-CaP was held on December 11, 2015 at the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, The University of Tokyo, attended by representatives of all participating countries and regions, who signed a memorandum of understanding concerning registration for A-CaP. Following the Board Meeting an A-CaP Launch Symposium was held. The symposium was attended by representatives of countries and regions participating in A-CaP, who gave presentations. Presentations and a keynote address were also delivered by representatives of the University of California San Francisco, USA, and the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Australia, who provided insight and experience on similar databases compiled in their respective countries.

The efficacy of peritubal analgesic infiltration in postoperative pain following percutaneous nephrolithotomy – A prospective randomized controlled study

ABSTRACT Objective: To study the efficacy of peritubal infiltration in postoperative pain following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in general PCNL patients and PCNL patients with supracostal renal access. Patients and Methods: A total of 105 PCNL patients were randomized into two groups, 53 patients receiving peritubal analgesic infiltration (study group) and 52 patients as the control group. Of these patients, supracostal access was performed in 22 patients of study group and 23 patients of control group. The study group received peritubal injection with 10mL of bupivacain. Postoperative pain as the primary outcome was assessed by using visual analogue scale at 1, 4, 12, 24 and 48 hours postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were the total postoperative morphine usage in 24 hours and time of the first analgesic demand. Results: The average VAS pain at 1 and 4 hours after the operation in the study group were significant lower in the control group (P≤0.001 and 0.026). Doses of morphine usage for controlling postoperative pain and the first analgesic demand were significantly lower and longer in study group. Among patients submitted to supracostal access, the average VAS pain at 1 hour after operation in the study group was lower (P=0.018). Doses of morphine usage for controlling postoperative pain also was lower in the study group (P=0.012). Conclusion: The peritubal local anesthetic infiltration is effective in alleviating immediate postoperative pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy even with supracostal access.

Urologic cancer in Thailand.

Cancer is a major health burden among non-communicable diseases, which has had a high impact on the healthcare system in Thailand. Based on GLOBOCAN, the prevalence of urologic cancer is increasing in Thailand. Prostate, bladder and kidney cancers are 6th, 15th and 22nd most common cancers, respectively, in both males and females. Prostate cancer is the fourth most common cancer in male. Cancer in the lower socioeconomic groups is a challenging problem due to greater exposure to the risk factors and more limited access to the healthcare service. The cancers are usually detected in advanced stages of the cancer. The most common histopathological finding of kidney cancer is a renal cell carcinoma. Transitional cell carcinoma is the most common histopathology of bladder. There is a trend of stage migration to earlier stages at first presentation, probably due to public awareness and laboratory screening. Patients with early stage are treated with minimally invasive modalities such as endoscopic, laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is the mainstay treatment of localized prostate cancer with the better outcome and less complication. Androgen deprivation therapy is usually for elderly or unfit patients. The strategy for early detection of early cancer is the important role of Thai urologists to manage these three common urologic cancers.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.

BACKGROUND: Stones in the urinary tract are a common medical problem in the general population. At present, the great expansion in minimally invasive techniques has led to the decrease in open surgery. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been introduced as an alternative approach which disintegrates stones in the kidney and upper urinary tract through the use of shock waves. Nevertheless, as there are limitations with the success rate in ESWL, other minimally invasive modalities for kidney stones such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) are also widely applied. This is an update of a review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to assess the effectiveness and complications of ESWL for kidney stones compared with PCNL or RIRS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 3 March 2014 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the use of ESWL compared to PCNL or RIRS for kidney stone management. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed all the studies for inclusion. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or mean difference (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Five studies (338 patients) were included, four studies compared ESWL to PCNL and one compared ESWL with RIRS. Random sequence generation was reported in three studies and unclear in two. Allocation concealment was not reported in any of the included studies. Blinding of participants and investigators could not be undertaken due to the nature of the interventions; blinding of outcome assessors was not reported. Reporting bias was judged to be low risk in all studies. One study was funded by industry and in one study the number of participants in each group was unbalanced.The success of treatment at three months was significantly greater in the PCNL compared to the ESWL group (3 studies, 201 participants: RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.62). Re-treatment (1 study, 122 participants: RR 1.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 4.99) and using auxiliary procedures (2 studies, 184 participants: RR 9.06, 95% CI 1.20 to 68.64) was significantly increased with ESWL group compared to PCNL. The efficiency quotient (EQ; used to assess the effectiveness of procedures) higher for PCNL than ESWL; however EQ decreased when stone size increased. Duration of treatment (MD -36.00 min, 95% CI -54.10 to -17.90) and hospital stay (1 study, 49 participants: MD -3.30 days, 95% CI -5.45 to -1.15) were significantly shorter in the ESWL group. Overall more complications were reported with PCNL, however we were unable to meta-analyse the included studies due to the differing outcomes reported and the timing of the outcome measurements.One study compared ESWL versus RIRS for lower pole kidney stones. The success of treatment was not significantly different at the end of the third month (58 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.30). Mean procedural time and mean hospital stay was reported to be longer in the RIRS group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Results from five small studies, with low methodological quality, indicated ESWL is less effective for kidney stones than PCNL but not significantly different from RIRS. Hospital stay and duration of treatment was less with ESWL. Larger RCTs with high methodological quality are required to investigate the effectiveness and complications of ESWL for kidney stones compared to PCNL if there is any technological progress in the non-invasive elimination of the residual fragments. Moreover, further research is required for the outcomes of ESWL and RIRS in lower and non-lower pole studies including PCNL versus RIRS.

Correlation and diagnostic performance of the prostate-specific antigen level with the diagnosis, aggressiveness, and bone metastasis of prostate cancer in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: The common tool for diagnosing prostate cancer is serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and digital rectal examination, but the disadvantage of the high sensitivity and low specificity of PSA testing in the diagnosis of prostate cancer is a problem in clinical practice. We studied the correlation and diagnostic performance of the PSA level with cancer diagnosis, aggressiveness of prostate cancer (Gleason score>7), and bone metastasis. METHODS: A total 1,116 patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound and prostate biopsy were retrospectively studied. The patients were divided into subgroups by baseline PSA level as follows: ≤4, 4.1-10, 10.1-20, 20.1-50, 50.1-100, and >100 ng/mL. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of each PSA level were evaluated for correlation and diagnostic performance with positive biopsy, Gleason score for aggressiveness, and bone metastasis. RESULTS: A positive biopsy result was found in 395 patients (35.39%). The PSA level corresponded well with the diagnosis of prostate cancer and a positive bone scan but moderately well with Gleason score as shown by AuROC for diagnosis of prostate cancer (0.82), positive bone scan (0.88), and Gleason score>7 (0.78). The specificity of a PSA level of 4.1-10, 10.1-20, 21.1-50, 50.1-100, and >100 ng/mL in the diagnosis prostate cancer was 9.3, 55.5, 87.5, 98.2, and 99.7, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The data showed a strong correlation of PSA level with tumor diagnosis, tumor aggressiveness, and bone metastasis. The prevalence of prostate cancer in this cohort was 35.39%. The chance of diagnosis of prostate cancer was greater than that for benign prostatic hyperplasia when the PSA level was higher than 20 ng/mL.

Management of prostate cancer in Asia: resource-stratified guidelines from the Asian Oncology Summit 2013.

Many local and systemic options for prostate cancer have emerged in recent years, but existing management guidelines do not account for diversity in health resources between different countries. We present recommendations for the management of prostate cancer, stratified according to the extent of resource availability-based on a four-tier system of basic, limited, enhanced, and maximum resources-to enable applicability to Asian countries with differing levels of health-care resources. This statement of recommendations was formulated by a multidisciplinary panel from Asia-Pacific countries, at a consensus session on prostate cancer that was held as part of the 2013 Asian Oncology Summit in Bangkok, Thailand.

The ideal puncture approach for PCNL: Fluoroscopy, ultrasound or endoscopy?

Percutaneous renal access is a common procedure in urologic practice. The main indications are drainage of an obstructed and hydronephrotic kidney and antegrade renal access prior to percutaneous renal surgeries such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and percutaneous endopyelotomy (EP). The contraindications for this technique are patients with history of allergy to topical or local anesthesia and patients with coagulopathy. The creation of a percutaneous tract into the renal collecting system is one of the important steps for percutaneous renal access. This step usually requires imaging. The advantages and disadvantages of each modality of image guidance are controversial. We performed a structured review using the terms: Percutaneous nephrostomy, guidance, fluoroscopy, ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT) scan, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The outcomes are discussed.