Adverse Event Assessment of Antimuscarinics for Treating Overactive Bladder: A Network Meta-Analytic Approach

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder (OAB) affects the lives of millions of people worldwide and antimuscarinics are the pharmacological treatment of choice. Meta-analyses of all currently used antimuscarinics for treating OAB found similar efficacy, making the choice dependent on their adverse event profiles. However, conventional meta-analyses often fail to quantify and compare adverse events across different drugs, dosages, formulations, and routes of administration. In addition, the assessment of the broad variety of adverse events is dissatisfying. Our aim was to compare adverse events of antimuscarinics using a network meta-analytic approach that overcomes shortcomings of conventional analyses. METHODS: Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialized Trials Register, previous systematic reviews, conference abstracts, book chapters, and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials comparing at least one antimuscarinic for treating OAB with placebo or with another antimuscarinic, and adverse events as outcome measures. Two authors independently extracted data. A network meta-analytic approach was applied allowing for joint assessment of all adverse events of all currently used antimuscarinics while fully maintaining randomization. RESULTS: 69 trials enrolling 26'229 patients were included. Similar overall adverse event profiles were found for darifenacin, fesoterodine, transdermal oxybutynin, propiverine, solifenacin, tolterodine, and trospium chloride but not for oxybutynin orally administered when currently used starting dosages were compared. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed generally applicable transparent network meta-analytic approach summarizes adverse events in an easy to grasp way allowing straightforward benchmarking of antimuscarinics for treating OAB in clinical practice. Most currently used antimuscarinics seem to be equivalent first choice drugs to start the treatment of OAB except for oral oxybutynin dosages of ≥ 10 mg/d which may have more unfavorable adverse event profiles

Inflammation in benign prostate tissue and prostate cancer in the finasteride arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

BACKGROUND: A previous analysis of the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) reported 82% overall prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation and identified a link between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer and serum PSA. Here we studied these associations in the PCPT finasteride arm. METHODS: Prostate cancer cases (N=197) detected either on a clinically indicated biopsy or on protocol-directed end-of-study biopsy, and frequency-matched controls (N=248) with no cancer on an end-of-study biopsy were sampled from the finasteride arm. Inflammation in benign prostate tissue was visually assessed using digital images of H&E stained sections. Logistic regression was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: In the finasteride arm, 91.6% of prostate cancer cases and 92.4% of controls had at least one biopsy core with inflammation in benign areas; p < 0.001 for difference compared to placebo arm. Overall, the odds of prostate cancer did not differ by prevalence (OR=0.90, 95% CI 0.44-1.84) or extent (P-trend=0.68) of inflammation. Inflammation was not associated with higher-grade disease (prevalence: OR=1.07, 95% CI 0.43-2.69). Furthermore, mean PSA concentration did not differ by the prevalence or extent of inflammationin either cases or controls. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation was higher in the finasteride than placebo arm of the PCPT, with no association with higher-grade prostate cancer. IMPACT: Finasteride may attenuate the association between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer. Moreover, the missing link between intraprostatic inflammation and PSA suggests that finasteride may reduce inflammation-associated PSA elevation

ProCOC: The prostate cancer outcomes cohort study

BACKGROUND: Despite intensive research over the last several decades on prostate cancer, many questions particularly those concerning early diagnosis and the choice of optimal treatment for each individual patient, still remain unanswered. The goal of treating patients with localized prostate cancer is a curative one and includes minimizing adverse effects to preserve an adequate quality of life. Better understanding on how the quality of life is affected depending on the treatment modality would assist patients in deciding which treatment to choose; furthermore, the development of prognostic biomarkers that indicate the future course of the illness is a promising approach with potential and the focus of much attention. These questions can be addressed in the context of a cohort study. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, multi-center cohort study within the canton of Zurich, Switzerland. We will include patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer independently of treatment finally chosen. We will acquire clinical data including quality of life and lifestyle, prostate tissue specimen as well as further biological samples (blood and urine) before, during and after treatment for setup of a bio-bank. Assessment of these data and samples in the follow up will be done during routine controls. Study duration will be at least ten years. Influence of treatment on morbidity and mortality, including changes in quality of life, will be identified and an evaluation of biomarkers will be performed. Further we intend to set up a bio-bank containing blood and urine samples providing research of various natures around prostate cancer in the future. DISCUSSION: We presume that this study will provide answers to pertinent questions concerning prognosis and outcomes of men with localised prostate cancer

BioPrev-C – development and validation of a contemporary prostate cancer risk calculator

ObjectivesTo develop a novel biopsy prostate cancer (PCa) prevention calculator (BioPrev-C) using data from a prospective cohort all undergoing mpMRI targeted and transperineal template saturation biopsy.Materials and methodsData of all men who underwent prostate biopsy in our academic tertiary care center between 11/2016 and 10/2019 was prospectively collected. We developed a clinical prediction model for the detection of high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≥7) based on a multivariable logistic regression model incorporating age, PSA, prostate volume, digital rectal examination, family history, previous negative biopsy, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor use and MRI PI-RADS score. BioPrev-C performance was externally validated in another prospective Swiss cohort and compared with two other PCa risk-calculators (SWOP-RC and PBCG-RC).ResultsOf 391 men in the development cohort, 157 (40.2%) were diagnosed with high-grade PCa. Validation of the BioPrev C revealed good discrimination with an area under the curve for high-grade PCa of 0.88 (95% Confidence Interval 0.82-0.93), which was higher compared to the other two risk calculators (0.71 for PBCG and 0.84 for SWOP). The BioPrev-C revealed good calibration in the low-risk range (0 - 0.25) and moderate overestimation in the intermediate risk range (0.25 - 0.75). The PBCG-RC showed good calibration and the SWOP-RC constant underestimation of high-grade PCa over the whole prediction range. Decision curve analyses revealed a clinical net benefit for the BioPrev-C at a clinical meaningful threshold probability range (≥4%), whereas PBCG and SWOP calculators only showed clinical net benefit above a 30% threshold probability.ConclusionBiopPrev-C is a novel contemporary risk calculator for the prediction of high-grade PCa. External validation of the BioPrev-C revealed relevant clinical benefit, which was superior compared to other well-known risk calculators. The BioPrev-C has the potential to significantly and safely reduce the number of men who should undergo a prostate biopsy

Evidence-Based PET for Abdominal and Pelvic Tumours

Evidence-based data about the usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) and hybrid imaging methods (PET/CT and PET/MRI) in abdominal and pelvic tumours have been collected and discussed in this chapter. These data were divided in three sections: (1) gastrointestinal tumours, (2) uro-genital tumours, (3) gynaecological tumours. Several pooled data (diagnostic and prognostic data), clinical settings (e.g. staging, restaging, treatment evaluation) and radiotracers as fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG), radiolabelled choline and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) were considered