Survival pattern of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients according to WHO/ISUP grade: a long-term multi-institutional study.

The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grading of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is classified from grade 1-4, regardless of subtype. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines (2022) state that if there is an adverse pathological feature, such as grade 3 or higher RCC in stage 1 patients, more rigorous follow-up imaging is recommended. However, the RCC guidelines do not provide specific treatment or follow-up policies by tumor grade. Therefore, this study attempted to find out whether tumor grade affects survival rates in patients with metastatic RCC. The Korean Renal Cancer Study Group (KRoCS) database includes 3108 patients diagnosed with metastatic RCC between September 1992 and February 2017, with treatment methods, progression, and survival data collected from 11 tertiary hospitals. To obtain information on survival rates or causes of death, we utilized the Korea National Statistical Office database and institutional medical records. Data were accessed for research purpose on June, 2023. We then reviewed these sources to gather comprehensive and reliable data on the outcomes of our study cohort. This database was retrospectively analyzed, and out of 3108 metastatic RCC patients, 911 had been identified as WHO/ISUP grade. Grades were classified into either a low-grade (WHO/ISUP grade 1-2) or a high-grade group (WHO/ISUP grade 3-4). The patients were then analyzed related to progression and overall survival (OS). In metastatic clear cell RCC patients, the 1-year OS rate was 69.4% and the median OS was 17.0 months (15.5-18.5) followed up to 203.6 months. When comparing the patient groups, 119 low-grade and 873 high-grade cases were identified. No baseline difference was observed between the two groups, except that the high-grade group had a higher ECOG 1 ratio of 50.4% compared with 34.5% for the low-grade group (p = 0.009). There was a significant difference in OS between high-grade and low-grade groups. OS was 16.0 months (14.6-17.4) in the high-grade group and 28.0 months (21.1-34.9) in the low-grade group (p < 0.001). However, there was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) rates with 9.0 months (8.0-10.0) for the high-grade group and 10.0 months (6.8-13.2) for the low-grade group (p = 0.377) in first-line treatment. In multivariable analysis, WHO/ISUP grade was a risk factor (HR = 1.511[1.135-2.013], p = 0.005) that influenced the OS. In conclusion, WHO/ISUP grade is a major data source that can be used as a ubiquitous marker of metastatic RCC in pre-IO era. Depending on whether the RCC is high or low grade, the follow-up schedule will need to be tailored according to grade, with higher-grade patients needing more active treatment as it can not only affect the OS in the previously known localized/locoregional recurrence but also the metastatic RCC patient.

Role of oral pentosan polysulfate in Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

PURPOSE: Intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) instillation, although an important treatment for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, exerts local and systemic adverse effects. Pentosan polysulfate (PPS) is a bladder mucosal protective drug that acts by replacing mucus in the glycosaminoglycan layer of the damaged urothelium. We hypothesized that co-administration of oral PPS with BCG instillation would relieve BCG-related adverse effects without affecting its efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 217 patients receiving BCG instillation were enrolled. They were placed in two groups and analyzed retrospectively: group A (n=122) received BCG instillation only and group B (n=95) received 100 mg of PPS thrice daily during the BCG treatment. RESULTS: After BCG instillation, the rate of BCG-treatment discontinuation owing to adverse effects was 15.6% in group A and 6.3% in group B (p=0.034). The proportion of patients with bacteriuria after BCG was higher in group B; however, no statistical difference was observed (28.7% vs. 41.1%; p=0.057). The proportion of patients with pyuria was significantly higher in group B (81.1% vs. 91.6%; p=0.029). The proportion of patients using antibiotics was significantly higher in group A (73.8% vs. 43.2%; p=0.001). The recurrence rate within 1 year was 29 (23.8%) in group A vs. 19 (20.0%) in group B (p=0.507). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that antibiotic use had a statistically significant effect on BCG discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Oral PPS effectively decreased the discontinuation rate and antibiotic use without affecting the BCG efficacy.

Targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Several comparative randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed including combinations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors since the publication of a Cochrane Review on targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 2008. This review represents an update of that original review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of targeted therapies for clear cell mRCC in patients naïve to systemic therapy. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on language or publication status. The date of the latest search was 18 June 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials, recruiting patients with clear cell mRCC naïve to previous systemic treatment. The index intervention was any TKI-based targeted therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the included studies and extracted data for the primary outcomes: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and serious adverse events (SAEs); and the secondary outcomes: health-related quality of life (QoL), response rate and minor adverse events (AEs). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 18 RCTs reporting on 11,590 participants randomised across 18 comparisons. This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of select comparisons. 1. Pazopanib versus sunitinib Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in PFS as compared to sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.23; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 420 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 18 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 76 fewer to 38 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in OS compared to sunitinib (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.06; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 27 more OSs (95% CI 19 fewer to 70 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in SAEs as compared to sunitinib (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 1 study, 1102 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 734 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more participants experiencing SAEs (95% CI 44 fewer to 66 more) per 1000 participants. 2. Sunitinib versus avelumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to avelumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.80; 1 study, 886 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 130 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 209 fewer to 53 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.79; 1 study, 886 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 890 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 29 fewer OSs (95% CI 78 fewer to 8 more) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in SAEs (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.10; 1 study, 873 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 705 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more SAEs (95% CI 49 fewer to 71 more) per 1000 participants.  3. Sunitinib versus pembrolizumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.76; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 590 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 125 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 195 fewer to 56 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably reduces OS (HR 1.90, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.65; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 880 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 96 fewer OSs (95% CI 167 fewer to 40 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may reduce SAEs as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 1 study, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence) although the CI includes the possibility of no effect. Based on the control event risk of 604 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 60 fewer SAEs (95% CI 115 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 participants.  4. Sunitinib versus nivolumab and ipilimumab Sunitinib may reduce PFS as compared to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.52; 1 study, 847 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 280 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months' follow-up, this corresponds to 89 fewer PFSs (95% CI 136 fewer to 37 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib reduces OS (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.89; 1 study, 847 participants; high-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk 600 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months, this would result in 140 fewer OSs (95% CI 219 fewer to 67 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably increases SAEs (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.53; 1 study, 1082 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 457 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 169 more SAEs (95% CI 101 more to 242 more) per 1000 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the low to high certainty of evidence, several combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be superior to single-agent targeted therapy in terms of PFS and OS, and with a favourable AE profile. Some single-agent targeted therapies demonstrated a similar or improved oncological outcome compared to others; minor differences were observed for AE within this group. The certainty of evidence was variable ranging from high to very low and all comparisons were based on single trials.

Convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: New minimal invasive surgeries have been suggested as alternative options to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy is a new technology that uses targeted, controlled water vapour energy (steam) to create necrotic tissue in the prostate. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and the Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus, Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 18 February 2020, with no restriction on the language or status of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, and non-randomised observational prospective studies with concurrent comparison groups, in which men with BPH underwent convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy, another active therapy, or a sham procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We had planned to perform statistical analyses using a random-effects model, and interpret them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We rated the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included a single, industry-sponsored RCT, with 197 randomised men, that compared convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy to a sham procedure. The mean age 62.9 years, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 21.97, and the mean prostate volume was 45.4 mL. We only found short-term data, measured up to three months. Primary outcomes Convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy may improve urologic symptom scores more than a sham procedure, measured on a IPSS scale (0 to 35; higher score represents worse urological symptoms) by a mean difference (MD) of -6.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.06 to -4.74; 195 men; low-certainty evidence), and likely improves quality of life (QoL), measured on a IPSS-QoL scale (0 to 6; higher score represents worse QoL), by a MD of -1.2 (95% CI -1.66 to -0.74; 195 men; moderate-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effects of convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy on major adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 6.79, 95% CI 0.39 to 117.00; 197 men; very low-certainty evidence) assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification system of III, IV, and V complications. Secondary outcomes We are very uncertain about the effects of convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy on retreatment (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 32.86; 197 men; very low-certainty evidence). Convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy may have little to no effect on erectile function (MD 0.4, 95% CI -1.91 to 2.71; 130 men; low-certainty evidence) and ejaculatory function (MD 0.5, 95% CI -0.83 to 1.83; 130 men; low-certainty evidence). Convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy may increase minor adverse events assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification system of Grade I and II complications (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.11; 197 men; low-certainty evidence). This would correspond to 434 minor adverse events per 1000 men (95% CI 264 more to 714 more). We are very uncertain about the effects of convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy on acute urinary retention (RR 4.98, 95% CI 0.28 to 86.63; 197 men; very low-certainty evidence). It likely greatly increases the rate of men requiring indwelling urinary catheters (RR 35.58, 95% CI 15.37 to 82.36; 197 men; moderate-certainty evidence). We were unable to perform any of the predefined secondary analyses. We found no evidence for other comparisons, such as convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy versus TURP or other minimal invasive procedures. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a sham procedure, urologic symptom scores and quality of life appear to improve with convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy, but we are very uncertain about major adverse events. The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low, with study limitations and imprecision being the most common reasons for rating down. These findings are based on a single industry-sponsored study, with three-month short-term follow-up. We did not find any studies comparing convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy to any other active treatment form, such as TURP.

Lymph-node ratio is an important clinical determinant for selecting the appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for curative D2-resected gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer, particularly stage III, improves survival after curative D2 gastrectomy. We investigated the clinical value of the lymph-node ratio (LNR; number of metastatic lymph nodes/number of lymph nodes examined) for selecting the appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen in patients with D2-resected stage II/III gastric cancer. METHODS: We reviewed the data of 819 patients who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Of them, 353 patients received platinum-based chemotherapy and 466 received TS-1. The patients were categorized into three groups according to their LNR (LNR 1, 0-0.1; LNR 2, > 0.1-0.25; and LNR 3, > 0.25), and their disease-free survival (DFS) was evaluated. RESULTS: The DFS curves of the patients were well separated according to stage and LNR. In multivariate analyses, an LNR > 0.1 was strongly associated with the 3-year DFS (hazard ratio 2.402, 95% confidence interval 1.607-3.590, P < 0.001). Platinum-based chemotherapy improved the 3-year DFS compared to TS-1 in patients with LNR 3 group in stage III gastric cancer (platinum vs. TS-1, median DFS 26.87 vs. 16.27 months, P = 0.028). An LNR > 0.1 was associated with benefiting from platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III gastric cancer patients with lymphovascular invasion (platinum vs. TS-1, median DFS 47.57 vs. 21.77 months, P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The LNR can be used to select the appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with D2-resected gastric cancer, particularly in stage III.

Aquablation of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: New, minimally invasive surgeries have emerged as alternatives to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Aquablation is a novel, minimally invasive, water-based therapy, combining image guidance and robotics for the removal of prostatic tissue. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of Aquablation for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and LILACS), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 11 February 2019, with no restrictions on the language or status of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs, as well as non-randomised observational prospective studies with concurrent comparison groups in which participants with BPH who underwent Aquablation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion at each stage, and undertook data extraction and 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments of the certainty of the evidence. We considered review outcomes measured up to and including 12 months after randomisation as short-term and beyond 12 months as long-term. MAIN RESULTS: We included one RCT with 184 participants comparing Aquablation to TURP. The mean age and International Prostate Symptom Score were 65.9 years and 22.6, respectively. The mean prostate volume was 53.2 mL. We only found short-term data for all outcomes based on a single randomised trial.Primary outcomesUp to 12 months, Aquablation likely results in a similar improvement in urologic symptom scores to TURP (mean difference (MD) -0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.51 to 2.39; participants = 174; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level due to study limitations. Aquablation may also result in similar quality of life when compared to TURP (MD 0.27, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.78; participants = 174, low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence certainty by two levels due to study limitations and imprecision. Aquablation may result in little to no difference in major adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.26; participants = 181, very low-certainty evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. This would correspond to 15 fewer major adverse events per 1000 participants (95% CI 64 fewer to 116 more). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level for study limitations and two levels for imprecision.Secondary outcomesUp to 12 months, Aquablation may result in little to no difference in retreatments (RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.18 to 15.83; participants = 181, very low-certainty evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. This would correspond to 10 more retreatments per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 fewer to 228 more). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level due to study limitations and two levels for imprecision.Aquablation may result in little to no difference in erectile function as measured by International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire Erectile Function domain compared to TURP (MD 2.31, 95% CI -0.63 to 5.25; participants = 64, very low-certainty evidence), and may cause slightly less ejaculatory dysfunction than TURP, as measured by Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction (MD 2.57, 95% CI 0.60 to 4.53; participants = 121, very low-certainty evidence). However, we are very uncertain of both findings. We downgraded the evidence certainty by two levels due to study limitations and one level for imprecision for both outcomes.We did not find other prospective, comparative studies comparing Aquablation to TURP or other procedures such as laser ablation, enucleation, or other minimally invasive therapies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up, the effect of Aquablation on urological symptoms is probably similar to that of TURP (moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on quality of life may also be similar (low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether patients undergoing Aquablation are at higher or lower risk for major adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether Aquablation may result in little to no difference in erectile function but offer a small improvement in preservation of ejaculatory function (both very low-certainty evidence). These conclusions are based on a single study of men with a prostate volume up to 80 mL in size. Longer-term data and comparisons with other modalities appear critical to a more thorough assessment of the role of Aquablation for the treatment of LUTS in men with BPH.

Naftopidil for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms compatible with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition in ageing men that may cause lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Treatment aims are to relieve symptoms and prevent disease-related complications. Naftopidil is an alpha-blocker (AB) that has a high affinity for the A1d receptor that may have advantages in treating LUTS in this setting. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009. Since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of naftopidil for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, LILAC, and Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status up to 31 May 2018 SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all parallel RCTs. We also included cross-over design trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Primary outcomes were urological symptom scores, quality of life (QoL) and treatment withdrawals for any reason; secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawals due to adverse events, acute urinary retention, surgical intervention for BPH, and cardiovascular and sexual adverse events. We considered outcomes measured up to 12 months after randomisation as short term, and later than 12 months as long term. We rated the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 22 RCTs with 2223 randomised participants across four comparisons for short-term follow-up. This abstract focuses on only two of four comparisons for which we found data since two comparators (i.e. propiverine and Eviprostat (phytotherapy)) are rarely used. One study comparing naftopidil to placebo did not report any relevant outcomes and was therefore excluded. There were no trials that compared to combination therapy with naftopidil or any 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) to combination therapy with other ABs and any 5-ARIs.All included studies were conducted in Asian countries. Study duration ranged from four to 12 weeks. Mean age was 67.8 years, prostate volume was 35.4 mL, and International Prostate Symptom Score was 18.3. We were unable to perform any of the preplanned subgroup analyses based on age and baseline symptom score.Naftopidil versus tamsulosinBased on 12 studies with 965 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in urological symptom score (mean difference (MD) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.09 to 1.04 measured on a scale from 0 to 35 with higher score representing increased symptoms), QoL (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.30; measured on a scale from 0 to 6 with higher scores representing worse QoL), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; corresponding to 7 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 32 fewer to 31 more). Naftopidil may have resulted in little to no difference in sexual adverse events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.22); this would result in 26 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants (95% CI 43 fewer to 13 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for urological symptom score and low for the other outcomes.Naftopidil versus silodosinBased on five studies with 652 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in the urological symptom scores (MD 1.04, 95% CI -0.78 to 2.85), QoL (MD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.66), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.23; corresponding to 26 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 62 fewer to 32 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as low for all these outcomes. Naftopidil likely reduced sexual adverse events (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; corresponding to 126 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants, 95% CI 139 fewer to 86 fewer). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for sexual adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Naftopidil appears to have similar effects in the urological symptom scores and QoL compared to tamsulosin and silodosin. Naftopidil has similar sexual adverse events compared to tamsulosin but has fewer compared to silodosin.

Trial Comparing a Combined Regimen of Amikacin and Ciprofloxacin to Ciprofloxacin Alone as Transrectal Prostate Biopsy Prophylaxis in the Era of High Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Rectal Flora.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether addition of amikacin to fluoroquinolone (FQ) antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces infections after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB). METHODS: A total of 503 patients undergoing rectal swab were divided into three groups. Patients with FQ-sensitive rectal flora (group 1, n = 248) were administered ciprofloxacin before TRUSPB, and patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora were either administered ciprofloxacin (group 2, n = 97) or amikacin and ciprofloxacin (group 3, n = 158) before TRUSPB. RESULTS: Based on the rectal swab, FQ resistance was 54.9%, and extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) positivity was 17.2%. The incidence of infectious complication in group 1 was 1.6%. Groups 2 and 3, with FQ-resistant rectal flora, tended to have increased infectious complications (5.2% and 4.4%, respectively) but the difference between those results is not statistically significant. The most common pathogens of infectious complications in patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora were FQ-resistant and ESBL-producing Escherichia coli. E. coli pathogens isolated in Group 3 were amikacin-susceptible species. The operation history and ESBL positivity of rectal flora increased the incidence of infectious complications (odds ratio [OR] = 3.68; P = 0.035 and OR = 4.02; P = 0.008, respectively). DM and antibiotics exposure were risk factors for FQ resistance (OR = 2.19; P = 0.002) and ESBL positivity of rectal flora (OR = 2.96; P = 0.005), respectively. CONCLUSION: Addition of amikacin to ciprofloxacin prophylaxis could not reduce infectious complications in patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora. Despite the amikacin sensitivity of infectious complications, single-dose amikacin addition to ciprofloxacin prophylaxis has limitations.

Povidone-iodine rectal cleansing and targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab cultures in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy are associated with reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of povidone-iodine rectal disinfection and targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy based on rectal swab culture results. METHODS: From January 2011 to December 2015, we studied differences in infectious complications in men who received povidone-iodine rectal disinfection with targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis and those who received empirical prophylaxis before transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Clinical variables including demographics, prior antibiotic, rectal swab culture results, povidone-iodine rectal cleansing, antibiotic prophylaxis, and infectious complications were evaluated. Patients were divided into three groups as follows: Group A received no povidone-iodine rectal cleansing but received empirical antimicrobial prophylaxis; group B received povidone-iodine rectal cleansing and empirical antimicrobial prophylaxis; and group C received povidone-iodine rectal cleansing and targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis. RESULTS: Patients were divided into group A (n = 192; 13.2 %), group B (n = 579; 39.9 %), or group C (n = 679; 46.8 %). In groups A and B, all patients received fluoroquinolone antimicrobial prophylaxis. Group C patients received targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis according to antibiotic resistance of rectal flora, and 71.1 % of these received fluoroquinolone antimicrobial prophylaxis. Infectious complication rates were 3.6, 2.9, and 1.3 % in group A, group B, and group C, respectively. Incidences of acute prostatitis and bacteremia were significantly lower in group C (p = 0.041 and p = 0.049, respectively) than in the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of quinolone resistance, the combination of povidone-iodine rectal cleansing and targeted antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce the rate of infectious complications.

Prognostic significance of the concomitant existence of lymphovascular and perineural invasion in locally advanced gastric cancer patients who underwent curative gastrectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we evaluated the prognostic significance of the concomitant existence of lymphovascular invasion and perineural invasion in patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 206 consecutive patients with Stage II or III gastric cancer who underwent curative D2 gastrectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy from April 2004 to December 2011 were analyzed. Patients were classified into four groups according to the presence (+) or absence (-) of lymphovascular invasion and perineural invasion: lymphovascular invasion-/perineural invasion- (n = 33), lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion- (n = 31), lymphovascular invasion-/perineural invasion+ (n = 54) and lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion+ (n = 88). RESULTS: A total of 136 patients (66.0%) received 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin adjuvant chemotherapy and 70 patients (34.0%) received TS-1. During the median follow-up period of 35.18 months, the median disease-free survival times for lymphovascular invasion-/perineural invasion-, lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion- and lymphovascular invasion-/perineural invasion+ were not reached at the time of analysis; however, median disease-free survival for lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion+ was the worst (36.73 months, P = 0.001). The median overall survival in the four groups was also not reached at the time of analysis; however, median overall survival with lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion+ was the poorest (P = 0.002). In a multivariate analysis, lymphovascular invasion+/perineural invasion+ was an independent prognostic factor for both disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.940, 95% confidence interval 1.157-3.252, P = 0.012) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 2.973, 95% confidence interval 1.561-5.662, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The concomitant existence of lymphovascular and perineural invasion has a significant prognostic impact on disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with Stage II or III gastric cancer.

Risk factors for and prophylactic effect of povidone-iodine rectal cleansing on infectious complications after prostate biopsy: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the risk factors and efficacy of a povidone-iodine enema on infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. METHODS: A total of 814 males who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy from January 2011 to December 2013 were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical variables, including demographics, prior antibiotic, or quinolone exposure, rectal swab culture results, povidone-iodine rectal cleansing, antibiotic prophylaxis, and infectious complications, were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 16 of 814 (2.0%) patients developed infectious complications after prostate biopsy. Of the patients with infectious complications, five had fever, two had urinary tract infections, and nine had bacteremia or sepsis. Infectious complication rates were not significantly different between povidone-iodine rectal cleansing (n = 613) and no cleansing (n = 201) groups (1.5 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.083). However, povidone-iodine rectal cleansing reduced severe infectious complications such as bacteremia and sepsis (0.3 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.001). A rectal swab culture was performed in 552 patients, and extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli were detected in 4.5 and 7.8% of cultures, respectively. Quinolone and antibiotic exposure within 6 months prior to prostate biopsy were associated with quinolone resistance and ESBL positivity of rectal flora and infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of quinolone resistance, a povidone-iodine enema may reduce the infectious complication rate by reducing bacterial load. Quinolone exposure prior to prostate biopsy was a risk factor for antibiotic resistance to rectal flora and infectious complications.

A prospective Korean multicenter study for infectious complications in patients undergoing prostate surgery: risk factors and efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis.

This multicenter study was undertaken to determine the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis and identify the risk factors for infectious complications after prostate surgery in Korean patients. A total of 424 patients who underwent surgery of the prostate were reviewed. All patients underwent urinalysis and urine culture preoperatively and postoperatively. Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis and risk factors for infectious complications were investigated. Infectious complications were observed in 34.9% of all patients. Factors independently associated with infectious complications were diabetes mellitus (adjusted OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.09-3.65, P=0.025) and operation time (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13, P=0.004). Clinicians should be aware of the high risk of infectious complications in patients with diabetes and those who undergo a prolonged operation time. Neither the type nor duration of prophylactic antibiotics resulted in differences in infectious complications.

Application of bone scans for prostate cancer staging: Which guideline shows better result?

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the accuracy of current guidelines by analyzing bone scan results and clinical parameters of patients with prostate cancer to determine the optimal guideline for predicting bone metastasis. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer and who underwent a bone scan. Bone metastasis was confirmed by bone scan results with clinical and radiological follow-up. Serum prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, percent of positive biopsy core, clinical staging and bone scan results were analyzed. We analyzed diagnostic performance in predicting bone metastasis of the guidelines of the European Association of Urology (EAU), American Urological Association (AUA), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as well as Briganti's classification and regression tree (CART). We also compared the percent of positive biopsy core between patients with and without bone metastases. RESULTS: A total 167 of 806 patients had bone metastases. Receiver operating curve analysis revealed that the AUA and EAU guidelines were better for detecting bone metastases than were Briganti's CART and NCCN. No significant difference was observed between AUA and EAU guidelines. Patients with bone metastases had a higher percent positive core than did patients without metastasis (the cut-off value >55.6). CONCLUSION: The EAU and AUA guidelines showed better results than did Briganti's CART and NCCN for predicting bone metastasis in the enrolled patients. A bone scan is strongly recommended for patients who have a higher percent positive core and who meet the EAU and AUA guidelines.