Clinical and histological predictive factors of reclassification of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Active surveillance (AS) has been established as a therapeutic strategy in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Demographic and anatomopathological factors that increase the probability of reclassifying patients have been identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Laboratory and histopathological data were collected from 116 patients included on AS since 2014. Univariate analysis was performed with Chi-square, t-student and Kendall's Tau, multivariate analysis according to logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 116 patients in AS, the median age at diagnosis was 66 years and the median follow-up was 13 months (2-72). Of these, 61 (52.6%) are still on surveillance, while 55 (47.4%) have left the program, mostly due to histological progression (52 patients (45.2%)); radical prostatectomy was performed in 27 (49.1%). Prostate volume (PV)≤60cc and the number of positive cylinders >1 in diagnostic biopsy (P=.05) were associated with higher reclassification rate in univariate analysis (P<.05). Multivariate analysis showed that these two variables significantly correlated with higher reclassification rate (PV 60 cc: OR 4.39, P=.04; >1 positive cylinder at diagnostic biopsy: OR 2.48, P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: It has been shown that initial ultrasound volume and the number of positive cylinders in the diagnostic biopsy are independent risk factors for reclassification. Initial PSA, laterality of the affected cylinders and PSA density were not predictive factors of progression in our series.

Development and implementation of an immunotherapy unit in a urology department.

INTRODUCTION: Immunotherapy is revolutionizing cancer treatment, with monoclonal antibodies directed against checkpoint regulatory molecules currently being the most widely used therapy. A total of six immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) drugs have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for use in various solid tumors of the genitourinary tract. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The literature is reviewed and the methodology, as well as our own experience, are analyzed to establish treatment with CPIs in a urology department. RESULTS: The requirements recommended in terms of training, logistics and procedure are described in order to safely offer expert treatment with CPIs to patients with genitourinary tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with the proposed program ensures safe administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors in a hospital setting.