The role of M1 and M2 macrophages in prostate cancer in relation to extracapsular tumor extension and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy

Introduction. The aim of our work was to investigate the causal connection between M1 and M2 macrophage phenotypes occurrence and prostate cancer, their correlation with tumor extension (ECE), and biochemical recurrence (BR). Patient and Methods. Clinical and pathological data were prospectively gathered from 93 patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Correlations of commonly used variables were evaluated with uni- and multivariate analysis. The relationship between M1 and M2 occurrence and BR was also assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Results. Above all in 63.4% there was a M2 prevalence. M1 occurred more frequently in OC disease, while M2 was more represented in ECE. At univariate analysis biopsy and pathologic GS and M2 were statistically correlated with ECE. Only pathologic GS and M2 confirmed to be correlated with ECE. According to macrophage density BCR free survival curves presented a statistically significant difference. When we stratified our population for M1 and M2,we did not find any statistical difference among curves. At univariate analysis GS, pTNM, and positive margins resulted to be significant predictors of BCR, while M1 and M2 did not achieve the statistical significance. At multivariate analysis, only GS and pathologic stage were independent predictors of BR. Conclusion. In our study patients with higher density of M count were associated with poor prognosis; M2 phenotype was significantly associated with ECE

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: fosfomycin trometamol, an attractive alternative

OBJECTIVE: To compare fosfomycin trometamol (FT) and ciprofloxacin (CIP) for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy (TR-PB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data for 1109 patients (mean age 66.7 \ub1 8.45) who underwent TR-PB between March to September 2015 in seven Italian urological institutions were retrospectively reviewed, of which 632 received FT (Group 1) and 477 received CIP (Group 2) for prophylaxis. We reviewed all urine culture results obtained after the procedure, all adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to the drug and all febrile and/or symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) occurring within 1 month after TR-PB. The rate of symptomatic UTIs and the rate of ADRs were considered the main outcome measures. RESULTS: In the total study population, 72/1109 (6.5 %) patients experienced symptomatic UTIs and among these 11 (0.9 % of total) had urosepsis. Out of 72, 53 (73.6 %) symptomatic UTIs were caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant strains. Out of 632, 10 (1.6 %) patients in Group 1 and 62/477 (12.9 %) patients in Group 2 had symptomatic UTIs (p < 0.001); in particular, 2/632 (0.3 %) patients in Group 1 and 9/477 (1.8 %) patients in Group 2 had urosepsis (p < 0.001). No differences were reported in terms of adverse events (0.6 vs 0.4 %; p = 0.70). A Charlson comorbidity index 641 and type of antimicrobial prophylaxis (FT) were found to be associated with a lower probability of symptomatic UTIs in the multivariate model. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis with FT for TR-PB had a lower rate of adverse events and a lower rate of symptomatic UTIs as compared with CIP. Fosfomycin trometamol appears as an attractive alternative prophylactic regimen in prostate biopsies