Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Prostatic Neoplasms HELP
Based on 47,945 articles since 2008
|||| 24 

These are the 47945 published articles about Prostatic Neoplasms that originated from Worldwide during 2008-2017.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20
1 Guideline Italian Prostate Biopsies Group: 2016 Updated Guidelines Insights. 2017

Fandella, Andrea / Scattoni, Vincenzo / Galosi, Andrea / Pepe, Pietro / Fiorentino, Michelangelo / Gaudiano, Caterina / Giampaoli, Marco / Gunelli, Roberta / Martino, Pasquale / Montanaro, Vittorino / Montironi, Rodolfo / Pierangeli, Tiziana / Stabile, Armando / Bertaccini, Alessandro. ·Department of Urology, Giovanni XXIII Clinic, Monastier di Treviso, Treviso, Italy. · Department of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy scattoni.vincenzo@hsr.it. · Institute of Urology, Marche Polytechnic University, Riuniti Hospital, Ancona, Italy. · Department of Urology, Canizzaro Hospital, Catania, Italy. · Department of Pathology, F. Addari Institute of Oncology, S. Orsola Hospital, Bologna, Italy. · Department of Radiology, S. Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. · Institute of Urology, S. Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. · Department of Urology, Hospital of Forlì, Forlì, Italy. · Department of Urology, University of Bari, Bari, Italy. · Department of Urology, Federico II University Hospital, Naples, Italy. · Institute of Pathology, Marche Polytechnic University, Ancona, Italy. · Prostate Cancer Prevention Unit, Department of Urology, INRCA, Ancona, Italy. · Department of Urology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. ·Anticancer Res · Pubmed #28179286.

ABSTRACT: AIM: To present a summary of the updated guidelines of the Italian Prostate Biopsies Group following the best recent evidence of the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the new data emerging from 2012-2015 was performed by a panel of 14 selected Italian experts in urology, pathology and radiology. The experts collected articles published in the English-language literature by performing a search using Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library database. The articles were evaluated using a systematic weighting and grading of the level of the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework system. RESULTS: An initial prostate biopsy is strongly recommended when i) prostate specific antigen (PSA) >10 ng/ml, ii) digital rectal examination is abnormal, iii) multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) ≥4, even if it is not recommended. The use of mpMRI is strongly recommended only in patients with previous negative biopsy. At least 12 cores should be taken in each patient plus targeted (fusion or cognitive) biopsies of suspicious area (at mpMRI or transrectal ultrasound). Saturation biopsies are optional in all settings. The optimal strategy for reducing infection complications is still a controversial topic and the instruments to reduce them are actually weak. The adoption of Gleason grade groups in adjunction to the Gleason score when reporting prostate biopsy results is advisable. CONCLUSION: These updated guidelines and recommendations are intended to assist physicians and patients in the decision-making regarding when and how to perform a prostatic biopsy.

2 Guideline [Prevention of radio-induced cancers]. 2016

Cosset, J-M / Chargari, C / Demoor, C / Giraud, P / Helfre, S / Mornex, F / Mazal, A. ·Département d'oncologie/radiothérapie, institut Curie, 26, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France. Electronic address: jeanmarc.cosset@gmail.com. · Service de curiethérapie, institut Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94800 Villejuif, France; Institut de recherche biomédicale des armées, 91223 Brétigny-sur-Orge, France. · Département de radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie de l'Ouest, boulevard J.-Monod, 44800 Saint-Herblain, Nantes, France; Unité Inserm 1018, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif, France. · Hôpital européen Georges-Pompidou, université Paris-Descartes, Paris-Cité Sorbonne, 20, rue Leblanc, 75015 Paris, France. · Département d'oncologie/radiothérapie, institut Curie, 26, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France. · Département d'oncologie radiothérapie, centre hospitalier Lyon-Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69310 Pierre-Bénite, Lyon, France. ·Cancer Radiother · Pubmed #27523416.

ABSTRACT: The article deals with the prevention of cancers only directly related to therapeutic radiation which are distinguished from "secondary cancer". The consideration of the risk of radiation-induced cancers after radiation therapy, although it is fortunately rare events, has become indispensable today. With a review of the literature, are detailed the various involved parameters. The age of the irradiated patient is one of the main parameters. The impact of the dose is also discussed based on the model used, and based on clinical data. Other parameters defining a radiation treatment are discussed one after the other: field with the example of Hodgkin's disease, the type of radiation and the participation of secondary neutrons, spreading and splitting. All these parameters are discussed according to each organ whose sensitivity is different. The article concludes with a list of recommendations to reduce the risk of radio-induced cancers. Even with the advent of conformal radiotherapy, intensity modulation, the modulated volume arctherapy, and the development of specific machinery for the extra-cranial stereotactic, the radiation therapist must consider this risk and use of reasonable and justified control imaging. Although they constitute a small percentage of cancers that occur secondarily after a first malignant tumor, radiation-induced cancers, can not and must not be concealed or ignored and justify regular monitoring over the long term, precisely adapted on the described parameters.

3 Guideline [Prostate cancer brachytherapy]. 2016

Pommier, P / Guérif, S / Peiffert, D / Créhange, G / Hannoun-Lévi, J-M / de Crevoisier, R. ·Département de radiothérapie, centre Léon-Bérard, 28, rue Laennec, 69373 Lyon cedex 8, France. · Département de radiothérapie, CHU de Poitiers, 350, avenue Jacques-Cœur, 86000 Poitiers, France. · Département de radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie de Lorraine Alexis-Vautrin, 6, avenue de Bourgogne, 54519 Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France. · Département de radiothérapie, centre Georges-François-Leclerc, 1, rue Professeur-Marion, BP 77980, 21079 Dijon cedex, France. · Département de radiothérapie oncologie, centre Antoine-Lacassagne, université Nice-Sophia, 33, avenue de Valombrose, 06000 Nice, France. · Département de radiothérapie, centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Eugène-Marquis, avenue Bataille-Flandres-Dunkerque, 35042 Rennes, France. Electronic address: r.de-crevoisier@rennes.unicancer.fr. ·Cancer Radiother · Pubmed #27523412.

ABSTRACT: Prostate brachytherapy techniques are described, concerning both Iodine 125 high dose rate brachytherapy. The following parts are presented: brachytherapy indications, technical description, immediate postoperative management and post-treatment evaluation, and 4 to 6 weeks as well as long-term follow-up.

4 Guideline [Prostate cancer external beam radiotherapy]. 2016

de Crevoisier, R / Pommier, P / Latorzeff, I / Chapet, O / Chauvet, B / Hennequin, C. ·Département de radiothérapie, centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Eugène-Marquis, avenue de la Bataille-Flandres-Dunkerque, 35042 Rennes, France. Electronic address: r.de-crevoisier@rennes.unicancer.fr. · Département de radiothérapie, centre régional de lutte contre le cancer Léon-Bérard, 28, rue Laennec, 69373 Lyon cedex 8, France. · Service de radiothérapie, groupe Oncorad-Garonne, clinique Pasteur, l'Atrium, 1, rue de la Petite-Vitesse, 31000 Toulouse, France. · Département de radiothérapie, centre hospitalier Lyon-Sud, hospices civils de Lyon, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France. · Département de radiothérapie, institut Sainte-Catherine, 250, chemin de Baigne-Pieds, 84918 Avignon cedex 9, France. · Service de cancérologie et radiothérapie, hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefaux, 75010 Paris, France. ·Cancer Radiother · Pubmed #27516051.

ABSTRACT: The prostate external beam radiotherapy techniques are described, when irradiating the prostate or after prostatectomy, with and without pelvic lymph nodes. The following parts are presented: indications of radiotherapy, total dose and fractionation, planning CT image acquisition, volume of interest delineation (target volumes and organs at risk) and margins, Intensity modulated radiotherapy planning and corresponding dose-volume constraints, and finally Image guided radiotherapy.

5 Guideline Clinical practice guidelines for ultrasound elastography: prostate. 2016

Anonymous860995. · ·J Med Ultrason (2001) · Pubmed #26926338.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

6 Guideline Trial Design and Objectives for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Updated Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3. 2016

Scher, Howard I / Morris, Michael J / Stadler, Walter M / Higano, Celestia / Basch, Ethan / Fizazi, Karim / Antonarakis, Emmanuel S / Beer, Tomasz M / Carducci, Michael A / Chi, Kim N / Corn, Paul G / de Bono, Johann S / Dreicer, Robert / George, Daniel J / Heath, Elisabeth I / Hussain, Maha / Kelly, Wm Kevin / Liu, Glenn / Logothetis, Christopher / Nanus, David / Stein, Mark N / Rathkopf, Dana E / Slovin, Susan F / Ryan, Charles J / Sartor, Oliver / Small, Eric J / Smith, Matthew Raymond / Sternberg, Cora N / Taplin, Mary-Ellen / Wilding, George / Nelson, Peter S / Schwartz, Lawrence H / Halabi, Susan / Kantoff, Philip W / Armstrong, Andrew J / Anonymous610902. ·Howard I. Scher, Michael J. Morris, Dana E. Rathkopf, and Susan F. Slovin, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College; David Nanus, NewYork Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center; Lawrence W. Schwartz, NewYork Presbyterian Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY; Walter M. Stadler, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL; Celestina Higano and Peter S. Nelson, University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Ethan Basch, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Emmanual S. Antonarakis and Michael A. Carducci, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Tomasz M. Beer, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR; Paul G. Corn and Christopher Logothetis, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Robert Dreicer, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA; Daniel J. George, Susan Halabi, and Andrew J. Armstrong, Duke University and Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC; Elisabeth I. Heath, Wayne State University Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit; and Maha Hussain, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI; Wm. Kevin Kelly, Sidney Kimmel School of Medicine at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Glenn Liu and George Wilding, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI; Mark N. Stein, The Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Charles S. Ryan and Eric J. Small, University of California Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA; Oliver Sartor, Tulane School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA; Matthew Raymond Smith, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School; Mary-Ellen Taplin and Philip W. Kantoff, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Karim Fizazi, Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Sud, Villejuif, Franc · ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #26903579.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Evolving treatments, disease phenotypes, and biology, together with a changing drug development environment, have created the need to revise castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) clinical trial recommendations to succeed those from prior Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Groups. METHODS: An international expert committee of prostate cancer clinical investigators (the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 [PCWG3]) was reconvened and expanded and met in 2012-2015 to formulate updated criteria on the basis of emerging trial data and validation studies of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 recommendations. RESULTS: PCWG3 recommends that baseline patient assessment include tumor histology, detailed records of prior systemic treatments and responses, and a detailed reporting of disease subtypes based on an anatomic pattern of metastatic spread. New recommendations for trial outcome measures include the time to event end point of symptomatic skeletal events, as well as time to first metastasis and time to progression for trials in the nonmetastatic CRPC state. PCWG3 introduces the concept of no longer clinically benefiting to underscore the distinction between first evidence of progression and the clinical need to terminate or change treatment, and the importance of documenting progression in existing lesions as distinct from the development of new lesions. Serial biologic profiling using tumor samples from biopsies, blood-based diagnostics, and/or imaging is also recommended to gain insight into mechanisms of resistance and to identify predictive biomarkers of sensitivity for use in prospective trials. CONCLUSION: PCWG3 moves drug development closer to unmet needs in clinical practice by focusing on disease manifestations most likely to affect prognosis adversely for therapeutics tested in both nonmetastatic and metastatic CRPC populations. Consultation with regulatory authorities is recommended if a trial is intended to seek support for drug approval.

7 Guideline The Evolving Biology of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Review of Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3. 2016

Geethakumari, Praveen Ramakrishnan / Cookson, Michael S / Kelly, William Kevin / Anonymous2120859. · ·Oncology (Williston Park) · Pubmed #26888794.

ABSTRACT: In 2008, the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 2 (PCWG2) developed consensus guidelines for clinical trial design and conduct that redefined trial endpoints, with a dual-objective paradigm: to (1) controlling, relieving, or eliminating disease manifestations at the start of treatment; and (2) preventing or delaying further disease manifestations. Clinical and translational research in prostate cancer has expanded our current-day understanding of the mechanisms of its pathogenesis, as well as the different clinicopathologic and molecular subtypes of the disease, and has improved the therapeutic armamentarium for the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). These new advances led to the development of the updated PCWG3 guidelines in 2015. In this review, we analyze our evolving understanding of the biology of CRPC, acquired resistance mechanisms, and emerging therapeutic targets in light of the updated PCWG3 guidelines. We present a joint perspective from the medical oncology and urologic disciplines on the ongoing efforts to advance clinical trial performance in order to discover new therapies for this fatal disease.

8 Guideline Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2016. 2016

Mohler, James L / Armstrong, Andrew J / Bahnson, Robert R / D'Amico, Anthony Victor / Davis, Brian J / Eastham, James A / Enke, Charles A / Farrington, Thomas A / Higano, Celestia S / Horwitz, Eric M / Hurwitz, Michael / Kane, Christopher J / Kawachi, Mark H / Kuettel, Michael / Lee, Richard J / Meeks, Joshua J / Penson, David F / Plimack, Elizabeth R / Pow-Sang, Julio M / Raben, David / Richey, Sylvia / Roach, Mack / Rosenfeld, Stan / Schaeffer, Edward / Skolarus, Ted A / Small, Eric J / Sonpavde, Guru / Srinivas, Sandy / Strope, Seth A / Tward, Jonathan / Shead, Dorothy A / Freedman-Cass, Deborah A. ·From Roswell Park Cancer Institute; Duke Cancer Institute; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center; Prostate Health Education Network (PHEN); Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance; Fox Chase Cancer Center; Yale Cancer Center/Smilow Cancer Hospital; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center; Moffitt Cancer Center; University of Colorado Cancer Center; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/The University of Tennessee Health Science Center; UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center; University of California San Francisco Patient Services Committee Chair; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center; Stanford Cancer Institute; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah; and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. ·J Natl Compr Canc Netw · Pubmed #26733552.

ABSTRACT: The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after an initial diagnosis of prostate cancer and management options for localized, regional, and metastatic disease. Recommendations for disease monitoring, treatment of recurrent disease, and systemic therapy for metastatic castration-recurrent prostate cancer also are included. This article summarizes the NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel's most significant discussions for the 2016 update of the guidelines, which include refinement of risk stratification methods and new options for the treatment of men with high-risk and very-high-risk disease and progressive castration-naïve disease.

9 Guideline The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. 2016

Epstein, Jonathan I / Egevad, Lars / Amin, Mahul B / Delahunt, Brett / Srigley, John R / Humphrey, Peter A / Anonymous8000846. ·*Departments of Pathology, Urology, and Oncology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD†Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden‡Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Cedars-Sinai, Los Angeles, CA§Department of Pathology & Molecular Medicine, Wellington School of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Otago-Wellington, Wellington South, New Zealand∥Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada¶Department of Pathology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT. · ·Am J Surg Pathol · Pubmed #26492179.

ABSTRACT: In November, 2014, 65 prostate cancer pathology experts, along with 17 clinicians including urologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists from 19 different countries gathered in a consensus conference to update the grading of prostate cancer, last revised in 2005. The major conclusions were: (1) Cribriform glands should be assigned a Gleason pattern 4, regardless of morphology; (2) Glomeruloid glands should be assigned a Gleason pattern 4, regardless of morphology; (3) Grading of mucinous carcinoma of the prostate should be based on its underlying growth pattern rather than grading them all as pattern 4; and (4) Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate without invasive carcinoma should not be assigned a Gleason grade and a comment as to its invariable association with aggressive prostate cancer should be made. Regarding morphologies of Gleason patterns, there was clear consensus on: (1) Gleason pattern 4 includes cribriform, fused, and poorly formed glands; (2) The term hypernephromatoid cancer should not be used; (3) For a diagnosis of Gleason pattern 4, it needs to be seen at 10x lens magnification; (4) Occasional/seemingly poorly formed or fused glands between well-formed glands is insufficient for a diagnosis of pattern 4; (5) In cases with borderline morphology between Gleason pattern 3 and pattern 4 and crush artifacts, the lower grade should be favored; (6) Branched glands are allowed in Gleason pattern 3; (7) Small solid cylinders represent Gleason pattern 5; (8) Solid medium to large nests with rosette-like spaces should be considered to represent Gleason pattern 5; and (9) Presence of unequivocal comedonecrosis, even if focal is indicative of Gleason pattern 5. It was recognized by both pathologists and clinicians that despite the above changes, there were deficiencies with the Gleason system. The Gleason grading system ranges from 2 to 10, yet 6 is the lowest score currently assigned. When patients are told that they have a Gleason score 6 out of 10, it implies that their prognosis is intermediate and contributes to their fear of having a more aggressive cancer. Also, in the literature and for therapeutic purposes, various scores have been incorrectly grouped together with the assumption that they have a similar prognosis. For example, many classification systems consider Gleason score 7 as a single score without distinguishing 3+4 versus 4+3, despite studies showing significantly worse prognosis for the latter. The basis for a new grading system was proposed in 2013 by one of the authors (J.I.E.) based on data from Johns Hopkins Hospital resulting in 5 prognostically distinct Grade Groups. This new system was validated in a multi-institutional study of over 20,000 radical prostatectomy specimens, over 16,000 needle biopsy specimens, and over 5,000 biopsies followed by radiation therapy. There was broad (90%) consensus for the adoption of this new prostate cancer Grading system in the 2014 consensus conference based on: (1) the new classification provided more accurate stratification of tumors than the current system; (2) the classification simplified the number of grading categories from Gleason scores 2 to 10, with even more permutations based on different pattern combinations, to Grade Groups 1 to 5; (3) the lowest grade is 1 not 6 as in Gleason, with the potential to reduce overtreatment of indolent cancer; and (4) the current modified Gleason grading, which forms the basis for the new grade groups, bears little resemblance to the original Gleason system. The new grades would, for the foreseeable future, be used in conjunction with the Gleason system [ie. Gleason score 3+3=6 (Grade Group 1)]. The new grading system and the terminology Grade Groups 1-5 have also been accepted by the World Health Organization for the 2016 edition of Pathology and Genetics: Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs.

10 Guideline Singapore Cancer Network (SCAN) Guidelines for the Management of Advanced Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer. 2015

Anonymous691041. · ·Ann Acad Med Singapore · Pubmed #26763057.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The SCAN genitourinary cancer workgroup aimed to develop Singapore Cancer Network (SCAN) clinical practice guidelines for the management of advanced castrate-resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The workgroup utilised a modified ADAPTE process to calibrate high quality international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to our local setting. RESULTS: Five international guidelines were evaluated- those developed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2014), the European Society of Medical Oncology (2013), the American Urological Association (2013), the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (2014) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Cancer Care Ontario (2014). Recommendations on the management of advanced castrate-resistant prostate cancer were developed. CONCLUSION: These adapted guidelines form the SCAN Guidelines 2015 for the management of advanced castrate-resistant prostate cancer.

11 Guideline NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 2.2015. 2015

Carroll, Peter R / Parsons, J Kellogg / Andriole, Gerald / Bahnson, Robert R / Barocas, Daniel A / Castle, Erik P / Catalona, William J / Dahl, Douglas M / Davis, John W / Epstein, Jonathan I / Etzioni, Ruth B / Farrington, Thomas / Hemstreet, George P / Kawachi, Mark H / Lange, Paul H / Loughlin, Kevin R / Lowrance, William / Maroni, Paul / Mohler, James / Morgan, Todd M / Nadler, Robert B / Poch, Michael / Scales, Chuck / Shaneyfelt, Terrence M / Smaldone, Marc C / Sonn, Geoffrey / Sprenke, Preston / Vickers, Andrew J / Wake, Robert / Shead, Dorothy A / Freedman-Cass, Deborah. · ·J Natl Compr Canc Netw · Pubmed #26656522.

ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer represents a spectrum of disease that ranges from nonaggressive, slow-growing disease that may not require treatment to aggressive, fast-growing disease that does. The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide a set of sequential recommendations detailing a screening and evaluation strategy for maximizing the detection of prostate cancer that is potentially curable and that, if left undetected, represents a risk to the patient. The guidelines were developed for healthy men who have elected to participate in the early detection of prostate cancer, and they focus on minimizing unnecessary procedures and limiting the detection of indolent disease.

12 Guideline Updated recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. 2015

Climent, Miguel Ángel / León-Mateos, Luis / González Del Alba, Aránzazu / Pérez-Valderrama, Begoña / Méndez-Vidal, M José / Mellado, Begoña / Arranz, José Ángel / Sánchez-Hernández, Alfredo / Cassinello, Javier / Olmos, David / Carles, Joan. ·Instituto Valenciano de Oncología (IVO), Valencia, Spain. Electronic address: macliment@fivo.org. · Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Pontevedra, Pontevedra, Spain. · Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. · Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain. · Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain. · Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain. · Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain. · Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, Castellón, Spain. · Hospital Universitario de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Spain. · Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain. · Vall d'Hebron University Hospital and Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain. ·Crit Rev Oncol Hematol · Pubmed #26100652.

ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer is the most prevalent male urogenital malignancy. Approximately 30% of patients with prostate cancer will develop advanced disease. Androgen deprivation therapy achieves disease control in about 90% of these patients, but the majority of them will eventually develop progressive disease, a status called castration-resistant prostate carcinoma (CRPC). However, in recent years, several new therapy strategies, such as immunotherapy, hormonal manipulations, chemotherapy agents and some bone-targeted therapies, have demonstrated an improvement in terms of overall survival in controlled trials. In 2012, the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) published its recommendations for the treatment of patients with CRPC. Due to the recent appearance of important new data and the complexity of decision-making in this field, SOGUG herein provides updated recommendations for the treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

13 Guideline Effect of the USPSTF Grade D Recommendation against Screening for Prostate Cancer on Incident Prostate Cancer Diagnoses in the United States. 2015

Barocas, Daniel A / Mallin, Katherine / Graves, Amy J / Penson, David F / Palis, Bryan / Winchester, David P / Chang, Sam S. ·Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. Electronic address: dan.barocas@vanderbilt.edu. · National Cancer Data Base, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois. · Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. · Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. ·J Urol · Pubmed #26087383.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: In October 2011 the USPSTF (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) issued a draft guideline discouraging prostate specific antigen based screening for prostate cancer (grade D recommendation). We evaluated the effect of the USPSTF guideline on the number and distribution of new prostate cancer diagnoses in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified incident cancers diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2012 in NCDB (National Cancer Database). We performed an interrupted time series to evaluate the trend of new prostate cancers diagnosed each month before and after the draft guideline with colon cancer as a comparator. RESULTS: Incident monthly prostate cancer diagnoses decreased by -1,363 cases (12.2%, p<0.01) in the month after the USPSTF draft guideline and continued to decrease by 164 cases per month relative to baseline (-1.8%, p<0.01). In contrast monthly colon cancer diagnoses remained stable. Diagnoses of low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancers decreased significantly but new diagnoses of nonlocalized disease did not change. Subgroups of age, comorbidity, race, income and insurance showed comparable decreases in incident prostate cancer following the draft guideline. CONCLUSIONS: There was a 28% decrease in incident diagnoses of prostate cancer in the year after the USPSTF draft recommendation against prostate specific antigen screening. This study helps quantify the potential benefits (reduced harms of over diagnosis and overtreatment of low risk disease and disease found in elderly men) and potential harms (missed opportunities to diagnose important cancers in men who may benefit from treatment) of this guideline.

14 Guideline Treatment of prostate cancer with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). 2015

Novaes, Pers / Mottas, R T / Lundgren, Msfs / Anonymous3780828. · ·Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) · Pubmed #25909199.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

15 Guideline Prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines: American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline endorsement. 2015

Resnick, Matthew J / Lacchetti, Christina / Penson, David F / Anonymous8060825. ·Vanderbilt University Medical Center; Tennessee Valley Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Nashville, TN; and American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA. · Vanderbilt University Medical Center; Tennessee Valley Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Nashville, TN; and American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA guidelines@asco.org. · ·J Oncol Pract · Pubmed #25829527.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

16 Guideline [Update of recommendations for evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis associated to endocrine and nutritional conditions. Working Group on Osteoporosis and Mineral Metabolism of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology]. 2015

Reyes-García, Rebeca / García-Martín, Antonia / Varsavsky, Mariela / Rozas-Moreno, Pedro / Cortés-Berdonces, María / Luque-Fernández, Inés / Gómez Sáez, José Manuel / Vidal Casariego, Alfonso / Romero Muñoz, Manuel / Guadalix Iglesias, Sonsoles / Fernández García, Diego / Jódar Gimeno, Esteban / Muñoz Torres, Manuel / Anonymous310993. ·Unidad de Endocrinología, Hospital General Universitario Rafael Méndez, Lorca, Murcia, España; Unidad de Metabolismo Óseo, Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, España. Electronic address: rebecarg@yahoo.com. · Unidad de Metabolismo Óseo, Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, España; Unidad de Endocrinología, Hospital Comarcal del Noroeste, Caravaca de la Cruz, Murcia, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital de Sant Pau i Santa Tecla, Tarragona, España. · Unidad de Metabolismo Óseo, Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, España; Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital General de Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, España. · Unidad de Endocrinología, Centro de Endocrinología, Diabetes y Nutrición, Madrid, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Virgen de la Salud de Toledo, Toledo, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge, Barcelona, España. · Sección de Endocrinología, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de León, León, España. · Unidad de Endocrinología, Hospital General Universitario Rafael Méndez, Lorca, Murcia, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Doce de Octubre, Madrid, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, España. · Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario Quiron, Madrid, España. · Unidad de Metabolismo Óseo, Servicio de Endocrinología, Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, España. · ·Endocrinol Nutr · Pubmed #25797189.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To update previous recommendations developed by the Working Group on Osteoporosis and Mineral Metabolism of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition for the evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis associated to different endocrine and nutritional diseases. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the Working Group on Osteoporosis and Mineral Metabolism of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition. METHODS: Recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) to describe both the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. A systematic search was made in MEDLINE (Pubmed) using the following terms associated to the name of each condition: AND "osteoporosis", "fractures", "bone mineral density", and "treatment". Papers in English with publication date between 18 October 2011 and 30 October 2014 were included. The recommendations were discussed and approved by all members of the Working Group. CONCLUSIONS: This update summarizes the new data regarding evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis associated to endocrine and nutritional conditions.

17 Guideline Guideline for referral of patients with suspected prostate cancer by family physicians and other primary care providers. 2015

Young, Sheila-Mae / Bansal, Praveen / Vella, Emily T / Finelli, Antonio / Levitt, Cheryl / Loblaw, Andrew / Anonymous4800823. · ·Can Fam Physician · Pubmed #25756141.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this guideline is to assist FPs and other primary care providers with recognizing features that should raise their suspicion about the presence of prostate cancer in their patients. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: Committee members were selected from among the regional primary care leads from the Cancer Care Ontario Provincial Primary Care and Cancer Network and from among the members of the Cancer Care Ontario Genitourinary Cancer Disease Site Group. METHODS: This guideline was developed through systematic review of the evidence base, synthesis of the evidence, and formal external review involving Canadian stakeholders to validate the relevance of recommendations. REPORT: Evidence-based guidelines were developed to improve the management of patients presenting with clinical features of prostate cancer within the Canadian context. CONCLUSION: These guidelines might lead to more timely and appropriate referrals and might also be of value for informing the development of prostate cancer diagnostic programs and for helping policy makers to ensure appropriate resources are in place.

18 Guideline Castration-resistant prostate cancer: AUA guideline amendment. 2015

Cookson, Michael S / Lowrance, William T / Murad, Mohammad H / Kibel, Adam S / Anonymous4340813. ·American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc., Linthicum, Maryland. · ·J Urol · Pubmed #25444753.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate relevant newly-published literature to better provide a rational basis for the management of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The original systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature yielded 303 articles published from 1996 through 2013. This review formed a majority of the guideline statements. Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions were used for guideline statements lacking sufficient evidence-based data. In April 2014, the CRPC guideline underwent amendment based on a second comprehensive literature search, which retrieved additional studies published between February 2013 and February 2014. Thirty-seven studies from this search provided data relevant to the specific treatment modalities for CRPC. RESULTS: Guideline statements based on six index patients developed to represent the most common scenarios encountered in clinical practice were amended appropriately. The additional literature provided the basis for an update of current supporting text as well as the incorporation of new guideline statements. Specifically, the addition of Radium-223 was placed in the guidelines related to the treatment of CRPC. CONCLUSIONS: Given the rapidly evolving nature of this field, this guideline should be used in conjunction with recent systematic literature reviews and an understanding of the individual patient's treatment goals. Patients' preferences and personal goals should be considered when choosing management strategies. The newly incorporated evidence-based statements supplement the original guideline published in 2013, which provided guidance for the treatment of men with CRPC. This guideline will be continually updated as new literature emerges in the field.

19 Guideline Adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement. 2014

Freedland, Stephen J / Rumble, R Bryan / Finelli, Antonio / Chen, Ronald C / Slovin, Susan / Stein, Mark N / Mendelson, David S / Wackett, Colin / Sandler, Howard M / Anonymous1710811. ·Stephen J. Freedland, Duke University, Durham; Ronald C. Chen, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC; R. Bryan Rumble, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA; Antonio Finelli, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto; Colin Wackett, Patient Advocate, Orillia, Ontario, Canada; Susan Slovin, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; Mark N. Stein, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; David S. Mendelson, Pinnacle Oncology Hematology, Scottsdale, AZ; Howard M. Sandler, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. · ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #25366677.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To endorse the American Urological Association (AUA)/American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) guideline on adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines developed by other professional organizations. METHODS: The guideline on adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO endorsement panel then reviewed the content and recommendations. RESULTS: The panel determined that the guideline recommendations on adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy, published in August 2013, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the guideline on adjuvant and salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy, adding one qualifying statement that not all candidates for adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy have the same risk of recurrence or disease progression, and thus, risk-benefit ratios are not the same for all men. Those at the highest risk for recurrence after radical prostatectomy include men with seminal vesicle invasion, Gleason score 8 to 10, extensive positive margins, and detectable postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA). RECOMMENDATIONS: Physicians should discuss adjuvant radiotherapy with patients with adverse pathologic findings at prostatectomy (ie, seminal vesicle invasion, positive surgical margins, extraprostatic extension) and salvage radiotherapy with patients with PSA or local recurrence after prostatectomy. The discussion of radiotherapy should include possible short- and long-term adverse effects and potential benefits. The decision to administer radiotherapy should be made by the patient and multidisciplinary treatment team, keeping in mind that not all men are at equal risk of recurrence or clinically meaningful disease progression. Thus, the risk-benefit ratio will differ for each patient.

20 Guideline Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test. 2014

Anonymous4240810 / Bell, Neil / Connor Gorber, Sarah / Shane, Amanda / Joffres, Michel / Singh, Harminder / Dickinson, James / Shaw, Elizabeth / Dunfield, Lesley / Tonelli, Marcello. · · Department of Family Medicine (Bell), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta.; Public Health Agency of Canada (Connor Gorber, Shane, Dunfield), Ottawa, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Joffres), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; Departments of Internal Medicine and Community Health Sciences (Singh), University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man.; Departments of Family Medicine and Community Health Sciences (Dickinson) and Office of the Associate Dean - Research (Tonelli), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.; Department of Family Medicine (Shaw), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont. ·CMAJ · Pubmed #25349003.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

21 Guideline SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. 2014

Cassinello, J / Climent, M A / González del Alba, A / Mellado, B / Virizuela, J A / Anonymous7160809. ·Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Universitario de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Spain. · ·Clin Transl Oncol · Pubmed #25319721.

ABSTRACT: Androgen deprivation treatment is the current standard first-line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. For several years, docetaxel was the only treatment with a proven survival benefit for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Since docetaxel became standard of care for men with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), three treatment virtual spaces, for treatment and drug development in CPRC, have emerged: pre-docetaxel, docetaxel combinations and post-docetaxel. Sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and radium-223 have been approved in the pre- or post-docetaxel setting in metastatic CRPC during the last few years. Patients are now living longer and experiencing better quality of life. Strategies for patient selection and treatment sequencing are therefore urgently required.

22 Guideline Late-onset hypogonadism or ADAM: diagnosis. 2014

Martits, Am / Costa, Emf / Nardi, Ac / Nardozza Jr, A / Faria, G / Facio Jr, Fn / Bernardo, Wm / Anonymous2600806 / Anonymous2610806. · ·Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) · Pubmed #25211408.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

23 Guideline Prostate cancer early detection, version 1.2014. Featured updates to the NCCN Guidelines. 2014

Carroll, Peter R / Parsons, J Kellogg / Andriole, Gerald / Bahnson, Robert R / Barocas, Daniel A / Catalona, William J / Dahl, Douglas M / Davis, John W / Epstein, Jonathan I / Etzioni, Ruth B / Giri, Veda N / Hemstreet, George P / Kawachi, Mark H / Lange, Paul H / Loughlin, Kevin R / Lowrance, William / Maroni, Paul / Mohler, James / Morgan, Todd M / Nadler, Robert B / Poch, Michael / Scales, Chuck / Shanefelt, Terrence M / Vickers, Andrew J / Wake, Robert / Shead, Dorothy A / Ho, Maria / Anonymous6830805. ·From UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center; UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center; Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine; The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center; Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance; Fox Chase Cancer Center; Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center at The Nebraska Medical Center; City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center; University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance; Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center; Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah; University of Colorado Cancer Center; Roswell Park Cancer Institute; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center; Moffitt Cancer Center; Duke Cancer Institute; University of Alabama at Birmingham Comprehensive Cancer Center; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital/University of Tennessee Health Science Center; and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. · ·J Natl Compr Canc Netw · Pubmed #25190691.

ABSTRACT: The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Early Detection provide recommendations for men choosing to participate in an early detection program for prostate cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight notable recent updates. Overall, the 2014 update represents a more streamlined and concise set of recommendations. The panel stratified the age ranges at which initiating testing for prostate cancer should be considered. Indications for biopsy include both a cutpoint and the use of multiple risk variables in combination. In addition to other biomarkers of specificity, the Prostate Health Index has been included to aid biopsy decisions in certain men, given recent FDA approvals.

24 Guideline ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Definitive External-Beam Irradiation in stage T1 and T2 prostate cancer. 2014

Nguyen, Paul L / Aizer, Ayal / Assimos, Dean G / D'Amico, Anthony V / Frank, Steven J / Gottschalk, Alexander R / Gustafson, Gary S / Hsu, I-Chow Joe / McLaughlin, Patrick W / Merrick, Gregory / Rosenthal, Seth A / Showalter, Timothy N / Taira, Al V / Vapiwala, Neha / Yamada, Yoshiya / Davis, Brian J / Anonymous4010805. ·*Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital †Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Boston, MA ‡Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL §American Urological Association, Linthicum, MD ∥Joint Center for Radiation Therapy, Boston, MA ¶American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA #MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX **Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco ∥∥Radiologic Associates of Sacramento and Sutter Cancer Center, Sacramento ##Western Radiation Oncology, Mountain View Oncology, Mountain View, CA ††William Beaumont Hospital, Troy ‡‡Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Novi, MI §§Schiffler Cancer Center and Wheeling Jesuit University, Wheeling, WV ¶¶Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA ***Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA †††Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY ‡‡‡Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. · ·Am J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #25180754.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To present the most updated American College of Radiology consensus guidelines formed from an expert panel on the appropriate use of external-beam radiation to manage stage T1 and T2 prostate cancer. METHODS: The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. RESULTS: The panel summarized the most recent and relevant literature on the topic and voted on 3 clinical variants illustrating the appropriate dose, techniques, and use of adjuvant hormone therapy with external-beam radiation for low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk prostate cancer. Numerical rating and commentary reflecting the panel consensus was given for each treatment approach in each variant. CONCLUSIONS: External-beam radiation is a key component of the curative management of T1 and T2 prostate cancer. By combining the most recent medical literature and expert opinion, this guideline can aid clinicians in the appropriate use of external-beam radiation for prostate cancer.

25 Guideline [Recommendations for cancer prevention]. 2014

Marzo-Castillejo, Mercè / Bellas-Beceiro, Begoña / Vela-Vallespín, Carmen / Nuin-Villanueva, Marian / Bartolomé-Moreno, Cruz / Vilarrubí-Estrella, Mercè / Melús-Palazón, Elena / Anonymous2630798. ·Unitat de Suport a la Recerca de Costa de Ponent, IDIAP Jordi Gol, Direcció d'Atenció Primària Costa de Ponent, Institut Català de la Salut, Barcelona, España. · Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España. · ABS del Riu Nord i Sud, Institut Català de la Salut, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, Barcelona, España. · Servicio de Gestión Clínica y Sistemas de Información, Dirección Atención Primaria, Servicio Navarro de Salud. · Unidad Docente de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria, Sector Zaragoza I, Servicio Aragonés de Salud, Zaragoza, España. · Centro de Salud Actur Oeste, Zaragoza, España. · ·Aten Primaria · Pubmed #24950629.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

Next