Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2025-01-09DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004371
{"title":"<i>The Journal of Urology<sup>®</sup></i> Home Study Course 2025 Volume 213/214.","authors":"","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000004371","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":"213 2","pages":"267-268"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142950654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-09-30DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004269
Benjamin V Stone, Christine A Dominas, Sharath K Bhagavatula, Sebastian W Ahn, Zuzana Tatarova, Juraj Jakubik, Destiny Matthew, Matthew Mossanen, Daniella Furtado, Kemal Tuncali, Michelle S Hirsch, Nobuhiko Hata, Clare Tempany, Oliver Jonas, Adam S Kibel
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess safety and feasibility of percutaneous magnetic resonance-guided placement of an implantable microdevice (IMD) to evaluate in situ intratumor response to multiple pharmacologic agents in men with intermediate-risk and high-risk localized prostate cancer.
Materials and methods: Biocompatible IMDs measuring 750 µm in diameter and 5 mm in length were prepared with 20 reservoirs containing candidate drug and drug combinations including second-generation androgen inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, PD-1 inhibitors, and conventional chemotherapy. Men with intermediate-risk or high-risk localized prostate cancer and MRI-visible lesions were enrolled. Up to 4 IMDs were placed using a transperineal approach into MRI-visible tumors 2 days before planned radical prostatectomy. After radical prostatectomy, the IMDs and a small segment of surrounding tumor tissue were removed and sectioned, stained, and analyzed for tissue drug response by a variety of pharmacodynamic markers.
Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled: 7 (50%) with intermediate-risk and 7 (50%) with high-risk localized prostate cancer. A total of 53 IMDs were implanted (mean 3.8 per patient), and 49 IMDs (92%) were successfully retrieved. All men underwent uncomplicated robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection 2 days after IMD placement. There were no severe adverse events. Pathological examination of the tissues adjacent to the IMDs demonstrated differential drug response within patients and between patients. Limitations include small sample size.
Conclusions: A multidrug IMD can be safely placed percutaneously into MRI-visible lesions before radical prostatectomy, enabling assessment of tumor-specific local response to multiple agents simultaneously within the tumor's normal stromal environment to guide targeted systemic therapy.
{"title":"Novel Intraprostatic Magnetic Resonance-Guided Implantation of Multidrug-Eluting Microdevice for Testing of Systemic Therapy Agents In Situ: Proof of Concept in Intermediate-Risk and High-Risk Prostate Cancer.","authors":"Benjamin V Stone, Christine A Dominas, Sharath K Bhagavatula, Sebastian W Ahn, Zuzana Tatarova, Juraj Jakubik, Destiny Matthew, Matthew Mossanen, Daniella Furtado, Kemal Tuncali, Michelle S Hirsch, Nobuhiko Hata, Clare Tempany, Oliver Jonas, Adam S Kibel","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004269","DOIUrl":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004269","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to assess safety and feasibility of percutaneous magnetic resonance-guided placement of an implantable microdevice (IMD) to evaluate in situ intratumor response to multiple pharmacologic agents in men with intermediate-risk and high-risk localized prostate cancer.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Biocompatible IMDs measuring 750 µm in diameter and 5 mm in length were prepared with 20 reservoirs containing candidate drug and drug combinations including second-generation androgen inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, PD-1 inhibitors, and conventional chemotherapy. Men with intermediate-risk or high-risk localized prostate cancer and MRI-visible lesions were enrolled. Up to 4 IMDs were placed using a transperineal approach into MRI-visible tumors 2 days before planned radical prostatectomy. After radical prostatectomy, the IMDs and a small segment of surrounding tumor tissue were removed and sectioned, stained, and analyzed for tissue drug response by a variety of pharmacodynamic markers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen patients were enrolled: 7 (50%) with intermediate-risk and 7 (50%) with high-risk localized prostate cancer. A total of 53 IMDs were implanted (mean 3.8 per patient), and 49 IMDs (92%) were successfully retrieved. All men underwent uncomplicated robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection 2 days after IMD placement. There were no severe adverse events. Pathological examination of the tissues adjacent to the IMDs demonstrated differential drug response within patients and between patients. Limitations include small sample size.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A multidrug IMD can be safely placed percutaneously into MRI-visible lesions before radical prostatectomy, enabling assessment of tumor-specific local response to multiple agents simultaneously within the tumor's normal stromal environment to guide targeted systemic therapy.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04399876.</p>","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":"173-182"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11717626/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142349233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-10-08DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004240
Sam S Chang
{"title":"Urologic Oncology: Bladder, Penis, and Urethral Cancer, and Basic Principles of Oncology.","authors":"Sam S Chang","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000004240","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":"213 2","pages":"264-265"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142950740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-12-03DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004308
Rachel Passarelli, Benjamin Lichtbroun, Saum Ghodoussipour, Vignesh T Packiam
{"title":"Editorial Comment.","authors":"Rachel Passarelli, Benjamin Lichtbroun, Saum Ghodoussipour, Vignesh T Packiam","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004308","DOIUrl":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004308","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":"215-216"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142770209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-10-30DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004303
Daniel D Joyce
{"title":"Editorial Comment.","authors":"Daniel D Joyce","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004303","DOIUrl":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004303","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":"215"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142546193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2025-01-09DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004326
Sandip M Prasad
{"title":"Reply by Authors.","authors":"Sandip M Prasad","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004326","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000004326","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":"213 2","pages":"216"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142950738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-10-30DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004301
Andrew C Peterson
{"title":"Editorial Comment.","authors":"Andrew C Peterson","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004301","DOIUrl":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004301","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":"227"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142546191","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01Epub Date: 2024-10-31DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004284
Andrei D Cumpanas, Mariah C Hernandez, Amanda McCormac, Marissa Ericson, Jaylen Lee, Jaime Altamirano-Villarroel, Candices M Tran, Zachary E Tano, Sohrab N Ali, Bruce M Gao, Pengbo Jiang, Roshan M Patel, Jaime Landman, Ralph V Clayman
Purpose: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the procedure of choice for the management of complex or large renal stones. A major challenge for the surgeon, however, is the need to assimilate the nearly 2000 static images from a CT scan into a functional mental image to enable surgical planning. Accordingly, we investigated the potential of immersive virtual reality (iVR) to enhance surgical planning and its impact on the outcomes among patients undergoing PCNL.
Materials and methods: Between 2019 and 2023, 175 patients undergoing PCNL were preoperatively randomized into a CT-only group (N = 89) or a CT+iVR group (N = 86). CT scans were rendered into iVR models that allowed the surgeon not only to visualize and manipulate each patient's relevant anatomy, but also to simulate the percutaneous approach to the proposed calyx. Postoperative CT scans were defined as absolute stone free, < 2 mm remnants, or 2.1 to 4 mm remnants.
Results: Preoperative visualization of the iVR model resulted in a changed calyx of entry in 30% of cases. The CT+iVR group had a significant improvement in absolute stone-free rate (33.70% vs 20.22%, P = .043) and overall < 4 mm remnant rate (62.79% vs 48.20%, P = .044). Clavien-Dindo II+IIIa complications were less in the iVR group (3.48% vs 12.30%, P = .03). The results were independent of the surgeon's years of PCNL experience.
Conclusions: Preoperative iVR model visualization benefited surgeons and patients alike. From a surgical standpoint, viewing the iVR model resulted in a safer, more effective percutaneous stone removal procedure.
{"title":"Preoperative Immersive Virtual Reality Applied to Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Study of Surgical Planning and Clinical Outcomes.","authors":"Andrei D Cumpanas, Mariah C Hernandez, Amanda McCormac, Marissa Ericson, Jaylen Lee, Jaime Altamirano-Villarroel, Candices M Tran, Zachary E Tano, Sohrab N Ali, Bruce M Gao, Pengbo Jiang, Roshan M Patel, Jaime Landman, Ralph V Clayman","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004284","DOIUrl":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004284","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the procedure of choice for the management of complex or large renal stones. A major challenge for the surgeon, however, is the need to assimilate the nearly 2000 static images from a CT scan into a functional mental image to enable surgical planning. Accordingly, we investigated the potential of immersive virtual reality (iVR) to enhance surgical planning and its impact on the outcomes among patients undergoing PCNL.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Between 2019 and 2023, 175 patients undergoing PCNL were preoperatively randomized into a CT-only group (N = 89) or a CT+iVR group (N = 86). CT scans were rendered into iVR models that allowed the surgeon not only to visualize and manipulate each patient's relevant anatomy, but also to simulate the percutaneous approach to the proposed calyx. Postoperative CT scans were defined as absolute stone free, <u><</u> 2 mm remnants, or 2.1 to 4 mm remnants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Preoperative visualization of the iVR model resulted in a changed calyx of entry in 30% of cases. The CT+iVR group had a significant improvement in absolute stone-free rate (33.70% vs 20.22%, <i>P</i> = .043) and overall < 4 mm remnant rate (62.79% vs 48.20%, <i>P</i> = .044). Clavien-Dindo II+IIIa complications were less in the iVR group (3.48% vs 12.30%, <i>P</i> = .03). The results were independent of the surgeon's years of PCNL experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preoperative iVR model visualization benefited surgeons and patients alike. From a surgical standpoint, viewing the iVR model resulted in a safer, more effective percutaneous stone removal procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":"162-172"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142558171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}