Beyond the genome: MALAT1's role in advancing urologic cancer care.

Urologic cancers (UCs), which include bladder, kidney, and prostate tumors, account for almost a quarter of all malignancies. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are tissue-specific RNAs that influence cell growth, death, and division. LncRNAs are dysregulated in UCs, and their abnormal expression may allow them to be used in cancer detection, outlook, and therapy. With the identification of several novel lncRNAs and significant exploration of their functions in various illnesses, particularly cancer, the study of lncRNAs has evolved into a new obsession. MALAT1 is a flexible tumor regulator implicated in an array of biological activities and disorders, resulting in an important research issue. MALAT1 appears as a hotspot, having been linked to the dysregulation of cell communication, and is intimately linked to cancer genesis, advancement, and response to treatment. MALAT1 additionally operates as a competitive endogenous RNA, binding to microRNAs and resuming downstream mRNA transcription and operation. This regulatory system influences cell growth, apoptosis, motility, penetration, and cell cycle pausing. MALAT1's evaluation and prognosis significance are highlighted, with a thorough review of its manifestation levels in several UC situations and its association with clinicopathological markers. The investigation highlights MALAT1's adaptability as a possible treatment target, providing fresh ways for therapy in UCs as we integrate existing information The article not only gathers current knowledge on MALAT1's activities but also lays the groundwork for revolutionary advances in the treatment of UCs.

Complications of immuno-oncology care: what urologist should know.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a practical review of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that may be encountered in uro-oncology patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a literature review of studies reporting irAEs including articles published through September 2023 for uro-oncology patients and the potential relevancy for the practicing urologist. RESULTS: Immunotherapy has revolutionised cancer treatment, extending its impact to urological malignancies including for patients with urothelial, kidney, and prostate cancers. Immuno-oncology (IO) compounds have achieved measurable and durable responses in these cancers. Urologists, choosing to administer or co-manage IO patient care, should be prepared to understand, evaluate, and treat irAEs. This review discusses the spectrum of irAEs that can be encountered. Ongoing trials are exploring the use of immunotherapy at earlier stages of uro-oncological diseases, thus underscoring the evolving landscape of urological cancer treatment. Paradoxically, some data suggests that the occurrence of irAEs is associated with improved oncological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Immune-related AEs, while manageable, may be life-threatening and require lifelong therapy. A thorough understanding of AEs and toxicity of a novel drug class is imperative.

Exosomal circRNAs: Novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets for urinary tumors.

Exosomal circRNAs have emerged as promising biomarkers and therapeutic targets for urinary tumors. In this review, we explored the intricate role of exosomal circRNAs in urological cancers, focusing on their biological functions, dysregulation in tumors, and potential clinical applications. The review delves into the mechanisms by which exosomal circRNAs contribute to tumor progression and highlights their diagnostic and therapeutic implications. By synthesizing current research findings, we present a compelling case for the significance of exosomal circRNAs in the context of urinary tumors. Furthermore, the review discusses the challenges and opportunities associated with utilizing exosomal circRNAs as diagnostic tools and targeted therapeutic agents. There is a need for further research to elucidate the specific mechanisms of exosomal circRNA secretion and delivery, as well as to enhance the detection methods for clinical translational applications. Overall, this comprehensive review underscores the pivotal role of exosomal circRNAs in urinary tumors and underscores their potential as valuable biomarkers and therapeutic tools in the management of urological cancers.

Understanding the Termination of Urologic Cancer Clinical Trials: Insights and Challenges.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials are valuable evidence for managing urologic malignancies. Early termination of clinical trials is associated with a waste of resources and may substantially affect patient care. We sought to study the termination rate of urologic cancer clinical trials and identify factors associated with trial termination. METHODS: A cross-sectional search of ClinicalTrials.gov identified completed and terminated kidney, prostate, and bladder cancer clinical trials started. Trials were assessed for reasons for termination. Multivariable analyses were conducted to determine the significant factors associated with the termination. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2020, 9,145 oncology clinical trials were conducted, of which 11.30% (n = 1,033) were urologic cancer clinical trials. Of the urologic cancer clinical trials, 25.38% (n = 265) were terminated, with low patient accrual being the most common reason for termination, 52.9% (n = 127). Multivariable analysis showed that only the university funding source odds ratio (OR) of 2.20 (95% CI, 1.45 to 3.32), single-center studies OR of 2.11 (95% CI, 1.59 to 2.81), and sample size of <50 were significant predictors of clinical trial termination OR of 5.26 (95% CI, 3.85 to 7.69); all P values are <.001. CONCLUSION: The termination rate of urologic cancer clinical trials was 25%, with low accrual being the most frequently reported reason. Trials funded by a university, single-center trials, and small trials (sample size <50) were associated with early termination. A better understanding of these factors might help researchers, funding agencies, and other stakeholders prioritize resource allocations for multicenter trials that aim to recruit a sufficient number of patients.

Interstate Telemedicine for Urologic Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: US states eased licensing restrictions on telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing interstate use. As waivers expire, optimal uses of telemedicine must be assessed to inform policy, legislation, and clinical care. We assessed whether telemedicine visits provided the same patient experience as in-person visits, stratified by in- vs out-of-state residence, and examined the financial burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients seen in person and via telemedicine for urologic cancer care at a major regional cancer center received a survey after their first appointment (August 2019-June 2022) on satisfaction with care, perceptions of communication during their visit, travel time, travel costs, and days of work missed. RESULTS: Surveys were completed for 1058 patient visits (N = 178 in-person, N = 880 telemedicine). Satisfaction rates were high for all visit types, both interstate and in-state care (mean score 60.1-60.8 [maximum 63], P > .05). More patients convening interstate telemedicine would repeat that modality (71%) than interstate in-person care (61%) or in-state telemedicine (57%). Patients receiving interstate care had significantly higher travel costs (median estimated visit costs $200, IQR $0-$800 vs median $0, IQR $0-$20 for in-state care, P < .001); 55% of patients receiving interstate in-person care required plane travel and 60% required a hotel stay. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine appointments may increase access for rural-residing patients with cancer. Satisfaction outcomes among patients with urologic cancer receiving interstate care were similar to those of patients cared for in state; costs were markedly lower. Extending interstate exemptions beyond COVID-19 licensing waivers would permit continued delivery of high-quality urologic cancer care to rural-residing patients.

Mesenchymal stem cells and their extracellular vesicles in urological cancers: Prostate, bladder, and kidney.

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are recognized for their remarkable ability to differentiate into multiple cell types. They are also known to possess properties that can fight cancer, leading to attempts to modify MSCs for use in anticancer treatments. However, MSCs have also been found to participate in pathways that promote tumor growth. Many studies have been conducted to explore the potential of MSCs for clinical applications, but the results have been inconclusive, possibly due to the diverse nature of MSC populations. Furthermore, the conflicting roles of MSCs in inhibiting tumors and promoting tumor growth hinder their adaptation to anticancer therapies. Antitumorigenic and protumorigenic properties of MSCs in urological cancers such as bladder, prostate, and renal are not as well established, and data comparing them are still limited. MSCs hold significant promise as a vehicle for delivering anticancer agents and suicide genes to tumors. Presently, numerous studies have concentrated on the products derived from MSCs, such as extracellular vesicles (EVs), as a form of cell-free therapy. This work aimed to review and discuss the current knowledge of MSCs and their EVs in urological cancer therapy.

Molecular Mechanisms of Tumor Progression and New Therapeutic Strategies for Urological Cancers.

Urological cancer encompasses a diverse range of tumors, including bladder, prostate, renal, upper urinary tract, and germ cell tumors [...].

Urological Tumor: A Narrative Review of Tertiary Lymphatic Structures.

BACKGROUND: Tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs), as ectopic lymphoid-like tissues, are highly similar to secondary lymphoid organs and are not only involved in chronic inflammation and autoimmune responses but are also closely associated with tumor immunotherapy and prognosis. The complex composition of the urological tumor microenvironment not only varies greatly in response to immunotherapy, but the prognostic value of TLSs in different urological tumors remains controversial. SUMMARY: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and other full-text database systems. TLSs, kidney cancer, uroepithelial cancer, bladder cancer, and prostate cancer as keywords, relevant literature was searched from the time the library was built to 2023. Systematically explore the role and mechanism of TLSs in urological tumors. It includes the characteristics of TLSs, the role and mechanism of TLSs in urological tumors, and the clinical significance of TLSs in urological tumors. KEY MESSAGES: The prognostic role of TLSs in different urological tumors was significantly different. It is not only related to its enrichment in the tumor but also highly correlated with the location of the tumor. In addition, autoimmune toxicity may be a potential barrier to its role in the formation of TLSs through induction. Therefore, studying the mechanisms of TLSs in autoimmune diseases may help in the development of antitumor target drugs.

Supportive care interventions for men with urological cancers: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: To identify supportive care interventions for men with urological cancers. METHODS: Experimental studies conducted among men with any urological cancer were eligible for inclusion. Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson), SocINDEX with Full Text, ERIC, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on 6 December 2022. No database limits were applied. The included studies were methodologically appraised. A narrative synthesis of the results was conducted. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included with 10 categories of interventions identified. Over 300 outcomes were measured, and more than 100 instruments were used. Multicomponent interventions generally led to positive changes in physiological outcomes like body mass index, as well as exercise tolerance and quality of life. This change, however, was not sustained in the long term. Cognitive-behavioural interventions significantly improved psychological symptoms but seldom physical symptoms. Telephone and web-based interventions showed great promise in improving outcomes like depression, positive affect, negative affect, perceived stress, spiritual wellbeing and fatigue. Findings from physical activity/exercise-based interventions were promising for both, physical and psychological outcomes. Rehabilitative interventions were associated with significant improvements in quality of life, urinary symptoms and psychological symptoms, albeit in the short term. Mixed results were reported for nurse-led interventions, family-based interventions and nutritional interventions. CONCLUSION: All but one study focused exclusively on prostate cancer. The included studies were significantly heterogeneous. Multicomponent, cognitive-behavioural, telephone and web-based, physical activity/exercise-based and rehabilitative interventions showed great promise in improving various outcomes. This improvement, however, was often short-lived.

Male infertility and urological tumors: Pathogenesis and therapeutical implications.

Most genitourinary tract cancers have a negative impact on male fertility. Although testicular cancers have the worst impact, other tumors such as prostate, bladder, and penis are diagnosed early and treated in relatively younger patients in which couple fertility can be an important concern. The purpose of this review is to highlight both the pathogenetic mechanisms of damage to male fertility in the context of the main urological cancers and the methods of preserving male fertility in an oncological setting, in light of the most recent scientific evidence. A systematic review of available literature was carried out on the main scientific search engines, such as PubMed, Clinicaltrials.Gov, and Google scholar. Three hundred twenty-five relevant articles on this subject were identified, 98 of which were selected being the most relevant to the purpose of this review. There is a strong evidence in literature that all of the genitourinary oncological therapies have a deep negative impact on male fertility: orchiectomy, partial orchiectomy, retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (RPLND), radical cystectomy, prostatectomy, penectomy, as well as radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal androgen suppression. Preservation of fertility is possible and includes cryopreservation, hormonal manipulation with GnRH analogs before chemotherapy, androgen replacement. Germ cell auto transplantation is an intriguing strategy with future perspectives. Careful evaluation of male fertility must be a key point before treating genitourinary tumors, taking into account patients' age and couples' perspectives. Informed consent should provide adequate information to the patient about the current state of his fertility and about the balance between risks and benefits in oncological terms. Standard approaches to genitourinary tumors should include a multidisciplinary team with urologists, oncologists, radiotherapists, psycho-sexologists, andrologists, gynecologists, and reproductive endocrinologists.

How to Improve Cancer Patients ENrollment in Clinical Trials From rEal-Life Databases Using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Oncology Extension: Results of the PENELOPE Initiative in Urologic Cancers.

PURPOSE: To compare the computability of Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP)-based queries related to prescreening of patients using two versions of the OMOP common data model (CDM; v5.3 and v5.4) and to assess the performance of the Greater Paris University Hospital (APHP) prescreening tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified the prescreening information items being relevant for prescreening of patients with cancer. We randomly selected 15 academic and industry-sponsored urology phase I-IV clinical trials (CTs) launched at APHP between 2016 and 2021. The computability of the related prescreening criteria (PC) was defined by their translation rate in OMOP-compliant queries and by their execution rate on the APHP clinical data warehouse (CDW) containing data of 205,977 patients with cancer. The overall performance of the prescreening tool was assessed by the rate of true- and false-positive cases of three randomly selected CTs. RESULTS: We defined a list of 15 minimal information items being relevant for patients' prescreening. We identified 83 PC of the 534 eligibility criteria from the 15 CTs. We translated 33 and 62 PC in queries on the basis of OMOP CDM v5.3 and v5.4, respectively (translation rates of 40% and 75%, respectively). Of the 33 PC translated in the v5.3 of the OMOP CDM, 19 could be executed on the APHP CDW (execution rate of 58%). Of 83 PC, the computability rate on the APHP CDW reached 23%. On the basis of three CTs, we identified 17, 32, and 63 patients as being potentially eligible for inclusion in those CTs, resulting in positive predictive values of 53%, 41%, and 21%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We showed that PC could be formalized according to the OMOP CDM and that the oncology extension increased their translation rate through better representation of cancer natural history.

Patient-centered outcomes of telehealth for the care of rural-residing patients with urologic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients residing in rural areas with urologic cancers confront significant obstacles in obtaining oncologic care. In the Pacific Northwest, a sizeable portion of the population lives in a rural county. Telehealth offers a potential access solution. METHODS: Patients receiving urologic care through telehealth or an in-person appointment at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Washington, were surveyed to assess appointment-related satisfaction and travel costs. Patients' residences were classified as rural or urban based on their self-reported ZIP code. Median patient satisfaction scores and appointment-related travel costs were compared by rural versus urban residence within telehealth and in-person appointment groups using Wilcoxon signed-rank or χ2 testing. RESULTS: A total of 1091 patients seen for urologic cancer care between June 2019 and April 2022 were included, 28.7% of which resided in a rural county. Patients were mostly non-Hispanic White (75%) and covered by Medicare (58%). Among rural-residing patients, telehealth and in-person appointment groups had the same median satisfaction score (61; interquartile ratio, 58, 63). More rural-residing than urban-residing patients in the telehealth appointment groups strongly agreed that "Considering the cost and time commitment of my appointment, I would choose to meet with my provider in this setting in the future" (67% vs. 58%, p = .03). Rural-residing patients with in-person appointments carried a higher financial burden than those with telehealth appointments (medians, $80 vs. $0; p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Appointment-related costs are high among rural-residing patients traveling for urologic oncologic care. Telehealth provides an affordable solution that does not compromise patient satisfaction.