Urologie最新文献

The gold standard in the treatment of localized and locally advanced renal cell carcinoma is surgery. Nevertheless, there is still a risk of tumor relapse. Reducing the risk of recurrence and extending overall survival is the goal of subsequent adjuvant treatment. The aim of this work is to discuss the current and future landscape of adjuvant therapy, taking into account the risk-benefit balance in the individual patient selected for adjuvant treatment. The immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) pembrolizumab demonstrated a significant increase in disease-free and overall survival after surgery for the first time. However, other CPI studies demonstrated no improvement. Patient selection for adjuvant treatment is currently based on the parameters of the TNM system. Prospective biomarkers are currently not available. Here, kidney injury molecule‑1 (KIM-1) represents an initial promising biomarker in the prediction of adjuvant immunotherapy.

Background: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for about 13.5% of all urological tumors. Healthcare research analyzes whether treatment recommendations from controlled studies or guidelines are being implemented in routine care. A prerequisite for the assessment and scientific study of the quality of care in the treatment of urological tumors is standardized documentation.

Objectives: This article illustrates healthcare research in RCC by presenting current data from the prospective of the VERSUS study (VERSorgUngsStudie) by d‑uo (Deutsche Uro-Onkologen).

Materials and methods: The VERSUS study is a noninterventional, prospective, multicentric study for the documentation and descriptive statistical analysis of the diagnosis, treatment, and aftercare of uro-oncological patients.

Results: Of 25,065 patients currently included in the VERSUS study, 1976 have a diagnosis of RCC. Data regarding stage distribution, reason leading to initial diagnosis, distribution of symptomatic vs. asymptomatic patients as well as surgical margins from surgical treatment of RCC are presented.

Conclusions: Despite providing interesting results, the VERSUS study remains limited with regard to the depth of the data, since it relies on the same dataset as the German cancer registry. In order to provide more comprehensive healthcare research, organ-related cancer registries like the Urothelial Cancer National Registry (UroNAT) and the Prostate Cancer National Registry (ProNAT) by d‑uo are necessary. These national cancer registries by d‑uo are unique in that they comprise all tumor stages. The Renal Cancer National Registry (ReNAT) by d‑uo is in preparation and will be a valuable contribution to quality assurance of oncological care in Germany.

Background: The treatment landscape of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has undergone fundamental changes in recent decades, moving away from the sole use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and towards intensified combination therapies.

Purpose: To what extent have the data from prospective phase III studies influenced clinical practice in the management of mHSPC over the past 5 or 10 years?

Results: A total of 1098 mHSPC patients with a median age at metastasis of 70 years and a median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 43 ng/ml were included in the present study. Significant differences were observed in terms of PSA nadirs in mHSPC after stratification by year of metastatic onset. Significant differences were also observed regarding systemic therapies applied in mHSPC and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC; p < 0.001). Regarding the annual estimated percentage change (EAPC) over the past 10 years, a significant decrease in ADT monotherapy from 85% (2013) to 29% (2023; EAPC: -12%, p < 0.001) was observed. Conversely, there was a significant increase in androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) use from 6% in 2013 to 55% in 2023 (EAPC: +21.7%, p < 0.001). Regarding docetaxel chemotherapy, a bell-shaped pattern was apparent over the past 10 years, with rates increasing from 8% in 2013 to 25% in 2019 and decreasing to 0% in 2023. The proportion of triplet therapies was 16% in 2023.

Conclusion: Over the past 10 years there has been an adaptation of intensified combination therapies for mHSPC in clinical reality, with the most frequent use of ARSI and triplet therapies.

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (nccRCC) account for approximately 20-25% of renal cell carcinomas. Approximately 20 different histologically and/or molecularly defined entities are subsumed under nccRCC. Many entities only have a share of 1% or less. Due to the rarity of the subpopulations, there are currently no larger randomized studies and there is a some uncertainty regarding the optimal treatment recommendations. The previous treatment recommendations for localized and advanced nccRCC are presented. Data from the various systemic therapies are presented. For nccRCC, there are no different entity-related therapy guidelines due to a lack of data and especially randomized studies. The tumors should be treated in the same way as clear cell renal cell carcinomas. Monotherapies with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI; in chromophobe RCC also with an mTOR inhibitor) or with combination therapy ICI/ICI or TKI/ICI (ICI: immune checkpoint inhibitor) can be used, depending on the risk factors and individual decision. Randomized trials are urgently needed.

Small renal masses (SRM) are a heterogeneous group of tumors with varying metastatic potential. The increasing use and improvement in the quality of abdominal imaging have led to an increasingly earlier diagnosis of incidental SRM, which are asymptomatic and confined to the organ. Despite these advances in imaging and the growing use of renal tumor biopsies, preoperative diagnosis of malignancy remains difficult. The treatment of SRM has shifted away from radical nephrectomy and now primarily includes organ-sparing surgery or active surveillance. The optimal strategy for treating SRM is continuously evolving as studies from prospective data registries can identify factors that influence both short- and long-term patient outcomes. Recent research on biomarkers, imaging techniques, and machine learning offer promising approaches to a deeper understanding of tumor biology and treatment options for this patient population.

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who remained on primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) after starting treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and to describe their treatment patterns.

Materials and methods: The study comprises a retrospective analysis of 609,308 patients in urological practices in Germany from 2011 to 2020 based on anonymized secondary data from the UROscience webserver. PCa patients were eligible for inclusion if they received ADT after a 6-month prescription-free pre-index period.

Results: A total of 3,112 patients (mean age 75.5 [±8.0] years) were included. Most patients received gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (72.3%), followed by antiandrogens (24.9%). The median duration of ADT treatment was 25.9 months. The estimated probabilities of continuing ADT 3, 6, and 8 years after starting treatment were 40.7%, 20.1%, and 12.7%, respectively. Interruption across all ADTs occurred in 42.7% of patients, switching of primary ADT in 52.2% and discontinuation in 82.2% of patients. After starting ADT, 14.6% of patients received treatment for CRPC, of whom 76.4% continued primary ADT. The median duration of CRPC treatment was 11.0 months. The estimated probabilities of developing CRPC 3, 6, and 8 years after starting ADT were 11.1%, 20.1%, and 25.9%, respectively.

Conclusion: This study has shown that a relevant proportion of patients discontinued primary ADT after starting treatment for CRPC, although guidelines recommend continuing ADT if the disease progresses.