A systematic review and meta-analysis of bone metabolism in prostate adenocarcinoma

<p/> <p>Background</p> <p>Osteoporosis could be associated with the hormone therapy for metastatic prostate carcinoma (PCa) and with PCa <it>per se</it>. The objective of this review is to determine the incidence of bone loss and osteoporosis in patients with PCa who are or are not treated with hormone therapy (ADT).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Medline, Embase, Cancerlit, and American Society of Clinical Oncology Abstract databases were searched for published studies on prostate cancer and bone metabolism. The outcomes assessed were: fracture, osteoporosis and osteopenia.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty-two articles (116,911 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. PCa patients under ADT had a higher risk of osteoporosis (RR, 1.30; <it>p </it>< 0.00001) and a higher risk of fractures (RR, 1.17; <it>p </it>< 0.00001) as compared to patients not under ADT. The total bone mineral density was lower in patients under ADT when compared with patients not under ADT (<it>p </it>= 0.031) but it was similar to bone mineral density found in healthy controls (<it>p </it>= 0.895). The time of androgen deprivation therapy correlated negatively with lumbar spine and total hip bone mineral density (Spearman's rho = -0.490 and -0.773; <it>p </it>= 0.028 and 0.001, respectively) and with total hip <it>t </it>score (Spearman's rho = -0.900; <it>p </it>= 0.037).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found consistent evidence that the use of androgen deprivation therapy in patients with PCa reduces bone mineral density, increasing the risk of fractures in these patients.</p

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer : the report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017

BACKGROUND: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. OBJECTIVE: To present the report of APCCC 2017. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. CONCLUSIONS: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. PATIENT SUMMARY: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

7th Drug hypersensitivity meeting: part two

No abstract availabl

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Association between Literacy, Compliance with Prostate Cancer Screening, and Cancer Aggressiveness: Results from a Brazilian Screening Study

Purpose Little is known about the effects of literacy levels on prostate cancer screening. This study evaluates the association between literacy, compliance with screening, and biopsy findings in a large Brazilian screening study. Materials and Methods We analyzed 17,571 men screened for PCa with digital rectal examination (DRE) and total and free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) from January 2004 to December 2007. Of those, 17,558 men had information regarding literate status. Full urological evaluation in a specialized cancer center was recommended in the case of: a) suspicious DRE, b) PSA > 4.0 ng/mL, or c) PSA 2.5-3.9 ng/mL and free/total PSA (f/tPSA) ratio 10 mg/mL (p = 0.03), clinical stage > T2a (p = 0.005), and biopsy Gleason > 7 (p = 0.02) were more common among illiterate men. Conclusions In a screened population, literacy levels were associated with prior PCa evaluations and with compliance with screening protocols. Illiterate men were at higher risk of being diagnosed with more advanced and aggressive PCa