Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BJU Int ; 129(6): 699-707, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34289231

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy in addition to standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicentre, prospective study included asymptomatic patients from 2014 to 2018 (NCT02138721). Cytoreductive radical prostatectomy was offered to all fit patients with resectable tumours, resulting in 40 patients. Standard of care was administered to 40 patients who were ineligible or unwilling to undergo surgery. The primary endpoint was castration resistant cancer-free survival at the time point of ≥50% events. The secondary endpoint was local event-free survival. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses with propensity-score analysis were applied. RESULTS: After a median (quartiles) follow-up of 35 (24-47) months, 42 patients became castration-resistant or died. The median castration resistant cancer-free survival was 53 (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-92) vs 21 (95% CI 15-27) months for cytoreductive radical prostatectomy compared to standard of care (P = 0.017). The 3-year estimates for local event-free survival were 83% (95% CI 71-95) vs 59% (95% CI 51-67) for cytoreductive radical prostatectomy compared to standard of care (P = 0.012). However, treatment group showed no significance in the multivariable models for castration resistant cancer-free survival (P = 0.5) or local event-free survival (P = 0.3), adjusted for propensity-score analysis. Complications were similar to the non-metastatic setting. Patients undergoing surgery were younger, with lower baseline prostate-specific antigen levels, alkaline phosphatase levels and metastatic burden. CONCLUSION: The present LoMP study was unable to show a difference between the two inclusion groups regarding castration resistant cancer-free survival for asymptomatic patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. These results validate previous evidence that, in well-selected and informed patients, cytoreductive radical prostatectomy is feasible and safe, with corresponding continence rates compared to the non-metastatic, high-risk setting. Whether cytoreductive radical prostatectomy could be a valuable option to achieve good local palliation needs to be further researched. Overall, the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy needs to be further explored in randomized studies to correct for potential bias.


Assuntos
Prostatectomia , Neoplasias da Próstata , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Próstata/patologia , Prostatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Int Braz J Urol ; 43(1): 134-141, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28124536

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare effectiveness of intravesical chondroïtin sulphate (CS) 2% and dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO) 50% in patients with painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis (PBS/IC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either 6 weekly instillations of CS 2% or 50% DMSO. Primary endpoint was difference in proportion of patients achieving score 6 (moderately improved) or 7 (markedly improved) in both groups using the Global Response Assessment (GRA) scale. Secondary parameters were mean 24-hours frequency and nocturia on a 3-day micturition dairy, changes from baseline in O'Leary-Sant questionnaire score and visual analog scale (VAS) for suprapubic pain. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were the intention to treat population (22 in CS and 14 in DMSO group). In DMSO group, 57% withdrew consent and only 6 concluded the trial. Major reasons were pain during and after instillation, intolerable garlic odor and lack of efficacy. In CS group, 27% withdrew consent. Compared with DMSO group, more patients in CS group (72.7% vs. 14%) reported moderate or marked improvement (P=0.002, 95% CI 0.05-0.72) and achieved a reduction in VAS scores (20% vs. 8.3%). CS group performed significantly better in pain reduction (-1.2 vs. -0.6) and nocturia (-2.4 vs. -0.7) and better in total O'Leary reduction (-9.8 vs. -7.2). CS was better tolerated. The trial was stopped due to high number of drop-outs with DMSO. CONCLUSIONS: Intravesical CS 2% is viable treatment for PBS/IC with minimal side effects. DMSO should be used with caution and with active monitoring of side effects. More randomized controlled studies on intravesical treatments are needed.


Assuntos
Sulfatos de Condroitina/administração & dosagem , Cistite Intersticial/tratamento farmacológico , Dimetil Sulfóxido/administração & dosagem , Administração Intravesical , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Inquéritos e Questionários , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Micção , Agentes Urológicos/administração & dosagem , Adulto Jovem
3.
Urology ; 106: 146-152, 2017 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28435034

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer in the context of the LoMP trial (which investigates the role of cytoreductive radical prostatectomy [cRP] in addition to standard of care [SoC]) and to provide a preliminary analysis of patient's characteristics, safety of cRP, and early local symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: cRP was performed in asymptomatic patients with a resectable tumor and who were fit to undergo surgery (group A, n = 17). Only SoC was administered to patients with metastatic prostate cancer ineligible or unwilling to undergo cRP (group B, n = 29). At 3 months, surgical complications related to cRP and local symptoms for both groups were evaluated. RESULTS: Median operation time, blood loss, and hospital stay for cRP were 215 minutes (150-290), 250 mL (100-900), and 4 days (2-7), respectively. Respectively 5 (29.4%) and 2 (11.8%) patients suffered grades 1 and 2 complications within 3 months postoperatively. When compared with Group B, patients in group A were younger (64 vs 72 years, P = .005), had lower initial prostate-specific antigen (15.9 vs 156 µg/L, P = .002), and less high-volume metastatic disease (5.9% vs 69%, P <.001). At 3 months, 5 (29.4%) patients in group A reported stress urinary incontinence without any further local symptoms. In group B, respectively 2 (6.8%), 11 (37.9%), and 2 (6.8%) patients suffered urge incontinence, obstructive voiding needing medical intervention, and ureteric obstruction. CONCLUSION: In a group of well-selected patients, cRP is safe. These patients have more favorable characteristics compared with patients treated with only SoC. If only SoC can be offered, patients are at risk to suffer from local symptoms.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução/métodos , Prostatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias da Próstata/cirurgia , Idoso , Seguimentos , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Estudos Prospectivos , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/secundário , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 43(1): 134-141, Jan.-Feb. 2017. tab
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS | ID: biblio-840799

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Objective To compare effectiveness of intravesical chondroïtin sulphate (CS) 2% and dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO) 50% in patients with painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis (PBS/IC). Materials and methods Patients were randomized to receive either 6 weekly instillations of CS 2% or 50% DMSO. Primary endpoint was difference in proportion of patients achieving score 6 (moderately improved) or 7 (markedly improved) in both groups using the Global Response Assessment (GRA) scale. Secondary parameters were mean 24-hours frequency and nocturia on a 3-day micturition dairy, changes from baseline in O’Leary-Sant questionnaire score and visual analog scale (VAS) for suprapubic pain. Results Thirty-six patients were the intention to treat population (22 in CS and 14 in DMSO group). In DMSO group, 57% withdrew consent and only 6 concluded the trial. Major reasons were pain during and after instillation, intolerable garlic odor and lack of efficacy. In CS group, 27% withdrew consent. Compared with DMSO group, more patients in CS group (72.7% vs. 14%) reported moderate or marked improvement (P=0.002, 95% CI 0.05-0.72) and achieved a reduction in VAS scores (20% vs. 8.3%). CS group performed significantly better in pain reduction (-1.2 vs. -0.6) and nocturia (-2.4 vs. -0.7) and better in total O’Leary reduction (-9.8 vs. -7.2). CS was better tolerated. The trial was stopped due to high number of drop-outs with DMSO. Conclusions Intravesical CS 2% is viable treatment for PBS/IC with minimal side effects. DMSO should be used with caution and with active monitoring of side effects. More randomized controlled studies on intravesical treatments are needed.


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Dimetil Sulfóxido/administração & dosagem , Sulfatos de Condroitina/administração & dosagem , Cistite Intersticial/tratamento farmacológico , Fatores de Tempo , Micção , Administração Intravesical , Medição da Dor , Estudos Prospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Resultado do Tratamento , Agentes Urológicos/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA