Phytotherapy in the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH): between evidence and empiricism

The treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) has been recently approved by different international guidelines like AUA, EAU, NICE, WHO consultation, etc, and drugs as the alpha-blockers and the 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors are widely indicated for this disease. Moreover, little space is given to the anti-cholinergics and recently to the phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. In this field of application, the phytotherapics, in particular Serenoa repens, are less or not recommended, because they are not supported by adequate scientific evidence. However, the use of these molecules is widely diffuse all over the world, achieving the first choice of treatment in some Nations such as the Asians.</br

Risk of cardiovascular toxicity with combination of immune-checkpoint inhibitors and angiogenesis inhibitors: a meta-analysis

IntroductionCombinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and angiogenesis inhibitors (AIs) have been investigated for the treatment of several tumor types. Both ICIs and AIs may lead to cardiovascular adverse events, and their combination may potentially increase the risk for cardiovascular toxicity. In the present meta-analysis, we aim to assess the cardiovascular toxicity of ICIs plus AIs vs. AIs alone. Secondary objectives are non-cardiovascular adverse events and efficacy.MethodsSystematic review was performed according to PRISMA statement. Phase II and III randomized clinical trials were identified by searching the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library and ASCO Meeting abstracts, from inception to June 2022. The pooled risks for overall response rate (ORR), 1-year progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), immune-related AEs, (irAEs), hypertension, and vascular events defined as stroke, myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolisms, were calculated.ResultsIn terms of cardiovascular toxicity, we found higher risk for severe hypertension among patients treated with ICIs plus AIs as compared with those receiving AIs (OR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.01–1.53), but no significant difference was found for any-grade hypertension, and for vascular events. There was also no difference in terms of overall AEs, whereas the incidence of irAEs was increased in the ICIs plus AIs arm, as expected. In terms of efficacy, ICIs plus AIs achieved better ORR (OR 2.25, 95% CI: 1.70–2.97) and PFS (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39–0.63) as compared to AIs alone.ConclusionThe addition of ICIs to AIs significantly increased the risk of high-grade hypertension, but not that of acute vascular events

Tailored treatment including radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy + androgen deprivation therapy versus exclusive radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer patients: results from a prospective study

Purpose To evaluate outcomes of patients with high risk prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) in a context of a multidisciplinary approach including adjuvant radiation (RT) + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Matherials and Methods 244 consecutive patients with high risk localized PCa underwent RP and bilateral extended pelvic lymph node dissection at our institution. Adjuvant RT + 24 months ADT was carried out in subjects with pathological stage ≥ T3N0 and/or positive surgical margins or in patients with local relapse. Results After a median follow-up was 54.17 months (range 5.4-117.16), 13 (5.3%) subjects had biochemical progression, 21 (8.6%) had clinical progression, 7 (2.9%) died due to prostate cancer and 15 (6.1%) died due to other causes. 136 (55.7%) patients did not receive any adjuvant treatment while 108 (44.3%) received respectively adjuvant or salvage RT+ADT. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that pre-operative PSA value at diagnosis is a significant predictive factor for BCR (HR: 1.04, p < 0.05) and that Gleason Score 8-10 (HR: 2.4; p<0.05) and PSMs (HR: 2.01; p < 0.01) were significant predictors for clinical progression. Radical prostatectomy group was associated with BPFS, CPFS, CSS and OS at 5-years of 97%, 90%, 95% and 86% respectively, while adjuvant radiation + androgen deprivation therapy group was associated with a BPFS, CPFS and CSS at 5-years of 91%, 83%, 95% and 88%, without any statistical difference. Conclusions Multimodality tailored treatment based on RP and adjuvant therapy with RT+ADT achieve similar results in terms of OS after 5-years of follow-up

Computational modeling of immune system of the fish for a more effective vaccination in aquaculture

1

Prevalence and Spectrum of Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 Variants of Uncertain Significance in Breast/Ovarian Cancer: Mysterious Signals From the Genome

About 10–20% of breast/ovarian (BC/OC) cancer patients undergoing germline BRCA1/2 genetic testing have been shown to harbor Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUSs). Since little is known about the prevalence of germline BRCA1/2 VUS in Southern Italy, our study aimed at describing the spectrum of these variants detected in BC/OC patients in order to improve the identification of potentially high-risk BRCA variants helpful in patient clinical management. Eight hundred and seventy-four BC or OC patients, enrolled from October 2016 to December 2020 at the “Sicilian Regional Center for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of Rare and Heredo-Familial Tumors” of University Hospital Policlinico “P. Giaccone” of Palermo, were genetically tested for germline BRCA1/2 variants through Next-Generation Sequencing analysis. The mutational screening showed that 639 (73.1%) out of 874 patients were BRCA-w.t., whereas 67 (7.7%) were carriers of germline BRCA1/2 VUSs, and 168 (19.2%) harbored germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants. Our analysis revealed the presence of 59 different VUSs detected in 67 patients, 46 of which were affected by BC and 21 by OC. Twenty-one (35.6%) out of 59 variants were located on BRCA1 gene, whereas 38 (64.4%) on BRCA2. We detected six alterations in BRCA1 and two in BRCA2 with unclear interpretation of clinical significance. Familial anamnesis of a patient harboring the BRCA1-c.3367G&gt;T suggests for this variant a potential of pathogenicity, therefore it should be carefully investigated. Understanding clinical significance of germline BRCA1/2 VUS could improve, in future, the identification of potentially high-risk variants useful for clinical management of BC or OC patients and family members

Tailored treatment including radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy + androgen deprivation therapy versus exclusive radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer patients: results from a prospective study

Purpose To evaluate outcomes of patients with high risk prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) in a context of a multidisciplinary approach including adjuvant radiation (RT) + androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Matherials and Methods 244 consecutive patients with high risk localized PCa underwent RP and bilateral extended pelvic lymph node dissection at our institution. Adjuvant RT + 24 months ADT was carried out in subjects with pathological stage ≥ T3N0 and/or positive surgical margins or in patients with local relapse. Results After a median follow-up was 54.17 months (range 5.4-117.16), 13 (5.3%) subjects had biochemical progression, 21 (8.6%) had clinical progression, 7 (2.9%) died due to prostate cancer and 15 (6.1%) died due to other causes. 136 (55.7%) patients did not receive any adjuvant treatment while 108 (44.3%) received respectively adjuvant or salvage RT+ADT. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis showed that pre-operative PSA value at diagnosis is a significant predictive factor for BCR (HR: 1.04, p < 0.05) and that Gleason Score 8-10 (HR: 2.4; p<0.05) and PSMs (HR: 2.01; p < 0.01) were significant predictors for clinical progression. Radical prostatectomy group was associated with BPFS, CPFS, CSS and OS at 5-years of 97%, 90%, 95% and 86% respectively, while adjuvant radiation + androgen deprivation therapy group was associated with a BPFS, CPFS and CSS at 5-years of 91%, 83%, 95% and 88%, without any statistical difference. Conclusions Multimodality tailored treatment based on RP and adjuvant therapy with RT+ADT achieve similar results in terms of OS after 5-years of follow-up

Contemporary Role of Testis Sparing Surgery: A Systematic Review

Testis-sparing surgery (TSS) represents a therapeutic choice for testicular cancer (TC). However, international guidelines are very cautious about the use of the testis-sparing technique, namely due to the lack of certain indications and long-term oncological outcomes. The aim of this systematic-review is to illustrate current trends of what may today be the uses of organ-sparing surgery in TC, to evaluate the relationship between the organ-sparing safety and oncological features such as definitive histology, tumour size, and post-surgery oncological outcomes. This analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. An electronic search of the Medline and Embase was undertaken until September 2014. The search was limited to English-Language articles. Current indications of TSS are synchronous bilateral testicular tumours, metachronous contralateral tumours, or tumour in a solitary testis with normal preoperative testosterone levels. Moreover, histological characteristics should not be taken into account when performing a TSS approach. TSS outcomes for germ cell tumours are encouraging and we reported high rates of disease-free survival and a few cases of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy. In light of the examined, TSS could be considered a viable alternative to radical surgery of the testis but it should be performed in specialised centres with competence

Chemoprevention of Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is is the most common solid neoplasm and it is now recognized as one of the most important medical problems facing the male population. Due to its long latency and its identifiable preneoplastic lesions, prostate cancer is an ideal target tumor for chemoprevention. Different compounds are available and certainly polyphenols represent those with efficacy against prostate cancer. This review take a look at activity and properties of major polyphenolic substances, such as epigallocatechin-3-gallate, curcumin, resveratrol and the flavonoids quercetin and genistein. Although the current studies are limited, mechanisms of action of polyphenols added with the lack of side effects show a a start for future strategies in prostate chemoprevention