Special populations in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review focuses on special populations poorly represented in current evidence-based practice for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This includes the elderly and frail, patients on immunosuppression or with autoimmune diseases, patients with brain, liver, and/or bone metastases, and RCC with sarcomatoid features. RECENT FINDINGS: Certain populations are poorly represented in current trials for mRCC. Patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases are often excluded from first-line therapy trials. Modern doublet systemic therapy appears to benefit patients with bone or liver metastases, but data supporting this conclusion is not robust. Post-hoc analyses on patients with sarcomatoid differentiation have shown improved response to modern doublet therapy over historical treatments. The elderly are underrepresented in current clinical trials, and most trials exclude all but high-performing (nonfrail) patients, though true frailty is likely poorly captured using the current widely adopted indices. It is difficult to make conclusions about the efficacy of modern therapy in these populations from subgroup analyses. Data from trials on other malignancies in patients with autoimmune diseases or solid organ transplant recipients on immunosuppression suggest that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may still have benefit, though at the risk of disease flare or organ rejection. The efficacy of ICIs has not been demonstrated specifically for RCC in this group of patients. SUMMARY: The elderly, frail, and immunosuppressed, those with tumors having aggressive histologic features, and patients with brain, bone, and/or liver metastases represent the populations least understood in the modern era of RCC treatment.

A narrative review on malleable and inflatable penile implants: choosing the right implant for the right patient.

A penile prosthesis/implant is an excellent option for men with erectile dysfunction refractory to medical treatment or with contraindications to medical management. In this narrative review, we discuss the different types of penile prostheses and the considerations for patient and device selection to maximize satisfaction. There are three main prosthesis types to choose from: three-piece inflatable devices, two-piece inflatable devices, and malleable/semirigid devices. The three-piece devices are the gold standard in advanced economy countries but require reservoir placement and manual dexterity, which can be limiting to some patients. The two-piece inflatable devices are a good option for patients who have standard-sized penises, lack significant penile pathology, have limited dexterity issues, or should avoid reservoir placement due to potential complications. The malleable devices are popular in countries where insurance coverage is limited but are increasingly used in advanced economy countries for length conservation in specific patient populations. Finally, not every patient needs an implant, and assessing partner sexual function is an important consideration for patient-partner satisfaction. Surgeons need to be familiar with the strengths and limitations of each device and the patient characteristics that will yield the best outcome from penile prosthesis surgery.

Postoperative events and complications of next-day stent removal following uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to longer stenting.

INTRODUCTION: Options for renal drainage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) vary and depend primarily on surgeon preference and case considerations. In our practice, patients traditionally returned one week postoperatively to remove the stents in the office via cystoscopy; however, following uncomplicated PCNL with no plans for second-look procedure, a ureteral stent on a tether is currently removed in tandem with the Foley catheter on postoperative day 1 (POD1) prior to patient discharge. This study compared the number of postoperative events between POD1 stent removal and their longer stented counterparts. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review on all patients who had undergone PCNL at our institution from January 1, 2020, to June 31, 2021. Patient demographics, operative metrics, and postoperative events (telephone calls, emergency department [ED ]/clinic visits, and complications) were recorded and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were included in final analysis: 46% (n=111) had their stent removed on POD1 and 54% (n=132) had longer indwelling stent times. Baseline demographics were similar between the two groups. Number of telephone calls (p=0.081), ED /clinic visits (p=0.093), and complications (p=0.647) were similar between groups. There were three (1.3%) unplanned second-look procedures: two (1.8%) in the POD1 stent removal group and one (0.8%, p=0.475) in the later stent removal group. CONCLUSIONS: In this limited, retrospective study, we did not detect a difference in postoperative events or short-term complications for POD1 vs. later stent removal after uncomplicated PCNL.

Two is company, is three a crowd? Triplet therapy, novel molecular targets, and updates on the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to highlight the most recent changes in the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma, a complicated and ever-changing field of research. RECENT FINDINGS: A recent meta-analysis examining combination therapy favors nivolumab plus cabozantinib as the overall survival leader in doublet therapy. Initial results on the first ever trial of triplet therapy have demonstrated improved progression-free survival over current standard of care. The hypoxia-inducible factor-2α (HIF-2α) inhibitor belzutifan is FDA approved for patients with von Hippel-Lindau disease and is currently being investigated in patients with nonhereditary renal cell carcinoma. The new glutamate synthesis inhibitor, telaglenastat, perhaps confers synergistic benefit when combined with everolimus, but combination with cabozantinib was not so effective. Dual mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition with sapanisertib does not appear to be an effective therapeutic option. New biomarkers and targets are actively being investigated. Four recent trials examining alternative agents to pembrolizumab in the adjuvant setting did not demonstrate an improvement in recurrence-free survival. Cytoreductive nephrectomy in the combination therapy era is supported by retrospective data; clinical trials are recruiting patients. SUMMARY: The last year ushered in novel approaches of varying success for managing advanced renal cell carcinoma, including triplet therapy, HIF-2α inhibitors, metabolic pathway inhibitors, and dual mTOR inhibitors. Pembrolizumab remains the only modern therapy available in the adjuvant setting, and the waters surrounding cytoreductive nephrectomy are still murky.

Bladder preservation in urothelial carcinoma: current trends and future directions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide a contemporary rationale for bladder preservation as a treatment strategy for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Although the standard of care for this important and serious clinical condition has been radical cystectomy augmented with neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy, it is associated with substantial morbidity and quality of life (QoL) implications. This article explores the bladder sparing alternatives to radical cystectomy and urinary diversion to assist Urologists, Medical Oncologists, and Palliative Care providers in their informed decision making with patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Bladder sparing strategies such as partial cystectomy and trimodality therapy offer long-term cancer outcomes comparable to radical cystectomy in carefully selected patients. Moreover, the toxicity profile in patients, having improved over time, is acceptable, including a low risk of salvage cystectomy. SUMMARY: Bladder preservation therapy offers an alternative to radical cystectomy. In some patients, it can be done with curative intent and in others it can assist with symptom palliation. Bladder preservation can maintain QoL and provide similar oncologic outcomes to radical surgery, although randomized controlled trials have not been performed. Understanding patient selection is a critical step in balancing bladder preservation and cancer survival.

A Contemporary Analysis of Pediatric Urology Surgical Volume at a Tertiary Care Center.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the annual volume of pediatric urology cases in an academic, tertiary care setting. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all patients operated on by 4 pediatric urologists (total of 2.5 full-time equivalents) at an academic, tertiary care center with a free-standing children's hospital from 2016 to 2017 (24 months). Basic case information was collected from operative reports. Descriptive statistics are reported using nonparametric methods. "Uncommon" was defined a priori as occurring <10% of the time. RESULTS: During the entire study period, 2718 patients underwent 4580 procedures. This equated to 1088 patients and 1832 procedures per full-time equivalent. Median age at surgery was 3.2 years (IQR 0.8-10) and 757 (16.5%) of patients were female. Most procedures were elective (4406, 96.2%) and did not require postoperative admission (3842, 83.9%). Urgent and emergent cases were uncommon (174, 3.8%). Most cases were classified as general pediatric urology (3894, 85%) with 319 (7%) classified as major reconstruction, 275 (6%) as laparoscopy/endourology and 92 (2%) as oncology. The most common cases involved the groin/scrotum (1415, 30.9%), prepuce (809, 17.7%), phallus (802, 17.5%), and endoscopy (652, 14.2%). All other case types were uncommon. CONCLUSION: This description of an academic pediatric urology practice at a tertiary care center with a free-standing children's hospital noted a high volume of elective, outpatient procedures that are largely general pediatric urology. Uncommon cases include urgent/emergent interventions, major reconstruction, laparoscopy/endourology, and oncology procedures.

A Retrospective Study of Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy and Receiving Peri-Operative Naloxegol or Alvimopan: Comparison of Length of Stay.

Alvimopan is a µ-opioid receptor antagonist used in the post-operative period to decrease rates of post-operative ileus (POI) following radical cystectomy (RC) and thereby shorten length of stay (LOS). Naloxegol is a much less expensive drug of the same class that has yet to be studied for prevention of POI in the peri-operative period. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate the differences in LOS and development of POI in patients post-RC who take alvimopan versus those who take naloxegol, with the hope that drug efficacy can be evaluated against the significant difference in cost burden between the two drugs. The study population included all adult patients between 18-89 years of age with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy with urostomy at University of Colorado Hospital. Those patients who received usual post-operative care as well as either alvimopan or naloxegol between September 2011 and December 2017 were selected for analysis. Patients who did not take either medication or were switched from one drug to the other were excluded from the study. A zero-truncated binomial regression analysis was used to analyze differences in length of stay in patients who received alvimopan versus those who received naloxegol. Additionally, the incidence of post-operative ileus was compared between treatment groups. 130 patients who underwent RC and received either alvimopan or naloxegol were included in the study: 75 (58%) received alvimopan and 55 (42%) received naloxegol. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the length of stay between patients who received alvimopan and patients who received naloxegol after adjusting for age, sex, BMI, length of surgical time, or stage of disease (p = 0.41). There was no significant between the two drugs for development of POI (p = 0.85). Development of POI was significantly associated with a longer LOS (p = 0.007). The analysis showed that naloxegol was comparable to alvimopan when it came to length of hospital stay following RC. Therefore, naloxegol may be offered as a less expensive, effective alternative to alvimopan.