Tags

Main Content

Top Content

Directory of Key words from the Journal and the latest article from it.

Genitourinary malignancyView Articles

Volume 18, Number 4Review Articles

Smoking-related Genitourinary Cancers: A Global Call to Action in Smoking Cessation

Disease Outcome Update

Marc A BjurlinJosh GottilebCory HigleyRoman Sosnowski

Smoking is a known modifiable risk factor in the development of genitourinary malignancies. Although the association has long been supported by numerous research studies, the impact of smoking cessation on the decreased risk of genitourinary malignancies is less well studied. PubMed databases were searched using the terms smoking, smoking cessation, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, prostate cancer, penile cancer, testicular cancer, their synonyms, and also targeted manual searches to perform a literature review in order to summarize the benefits of cessation on disease progression and patient outcomes including survival and morbidities. Our review yielded substantial evidence highlighting the improved outcomes observed in those diagnosed with bladder, renal, and prostate cancers. The risk of bladder cancer is reduced by up to 60% in those who were able to quit for 25 years and the risk of kidney malignancy was reduced by 50% in those who abstained from smoking for 30 years. A similar trend of reduced risk was observed for prostate cancer with those who quit for more than 10 years, having prostate cancer mortality risks similar to those that never smoked. Although the data were encouraging for bladder, renal, and prostate malignancies, there are comparatively limited data quantifying the benefits of smoking cessation for penile and testicular cancers, highlighting an opportunity for further study. The role of urologists and their impact on their patients’ likelihood to quit smoking shows more than half of urologists never discuss smoking cessation upon diagnosis of a malignancy. Most urologists said they did not provide cessation counseling because they do not believe it would alter their patients’ disease progression. Studies show urologists have more influence at changing their patients’ smoking behaviors than their primary care physicians. The diagnosis of cancer may lead to a teachable moment resulting in increased smoking quit rates. Furthermore, implementing a brief 5-minute clinic counseling session increases quit attempts and quit rates. Diagnosis of genitourinary cancers and the following appointments for treatment provide a unique opportunity for urologists to intervene and affect the progression and outcome of disease. [Rev Urol. 2016;18(4):194-204 doi: 10.3909/riu0729] © 2016 MedReviews®, LLC

SmokingRisk reductionSmoking cessationGenitourinary malignancy

Genomic biomarkerView Articles

Volume 19, Number 4Review Articles

Active Surveillance Use Among a Low-risk Prostate Cancer Population in a Large US Payer System: 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Versus Other Risk Stratification Methods

Original Research

Michael J KemeterPhillip G FebboSteven CanfieldJohn Hornberger

Many men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) receive definitive treatment despite recommendations that have been informed by two large, randomized trials encouraging active surveillance (AS). We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Optum™ Research Database (Eden Prairie, MN) of electronic health records and administrative claims data to assess AS use for patients tested with a 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score™ (GPS; Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA) assay and/or prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). De-identified records were extracted on health plan members enrolled from June 2013 to June 2016 who had ≥1 record of PCa (n = 291,876). Inclusion criteria included age ≥18 years, new diagnosis, American Urological Association low-risk PCa (stage T1-T2a, prostate-specific antigen ≥10 ng/mL, Gleason score = 6), and clinical activity for at least 12 months before and after diagnosis. Data included baseline characteristics, use of GPS testing and/or MRI, and definitive procedures. GPS or MRI testing was performed in 17% of men (GPS, n = 375, 4%; MRI, n = 1174, 13%). AS use varied from a low of 43% for men who only underwent MRI to 89% for GPS-tested men who did not undergo MRI (P<001). At 6-month follow-up, AS use was 31.0% higher (95% CI, 27.6%-34.5%; P<001) for men receiving the GPS test only versus men who did not undergo GPS testing or MRI; the difference was 30.5% at 12-month follow-up. In a large US payer system, the GPS assay was associated with significantly higher AS use at 6 and 12 months compared with men who had MRI only, or no GPS or MRI testing. [Rev Urol. 2017;19(4):203–212 doi: 10.3909/riu0786] © 2018 MedReviews®, LLC

Prostate cancerActive surveillanceEvidence-based practiceComparative effectiveness researchGenomic biomarkerMagnetic resonance imaging

Genomic classifierView Articles

Volume 18, Number 1Review Articles

Contemporary Role of the Decipher® Test in Prostate Cancer Management: Current Practice and Future Perspectives

Management Update

Deepansh DalelaBjörn LöppenbergAkshay SoodJesse SammonFiras Abdollah

We performed a systematic literature search to identify original articles and editorials about the Decipher® Prostate Cancer Test (GenomeDx Biosciences, San Diego, CA) to provide an overview of the current literature and its present role in urologic clinical practice. The Decipher test, which uses the expression of 22 selected RNA markers (from a total of over 1.4 million), showed a very high discrimination in predicting clinical metastasis (0.75-0.83) and cancer-specific mortality (0.78) in external validation studies, outperforming all routinely available clinicopathologic characteristics. Further, the timing of postoperative radiotherapy (adjuvant vs salvage) may be guided based on Decipher scores. The Decipher test was also the only independent predictor of clinical metastasis in patients with biochemical recurrence after surgery. The Decipher Genomic Resource Information Database (GRID) is a novel research tool that captures 1.4 million marker expressions per patient and may facilitate precision-guided, individualized care to patients with prostate cancer. In this era of precision medicine, Decipher, along with the Decipher GRID platform, is a promising genomic tool that may aid in managing prostate cancer patients throughout the continuum of care and delivering appropriate treatment at an individualized level. [Rev Urol. 2016;18(1):1-9 doi: 10.3909/riu0706] © 2016 MedReviews®, LLC

Prostate cancerDecipher® Prostate Cancer TestGenomic classifierNeoplasm recurrenceLocal/surgeryTreatment outcome

Genomic prostate scoreView Articles

Volume 16, Number 4Review Articles

A Guide for Clinicians in the Evaluation of Emerging Molecular Diagnostics for Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

Diagnosis Update

Michael J KemeterPhillip G FebboSteven E CanfieldAdam S KibelH Jeffrey LawrenceJudd W Moul

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is associated with a decline in prostate cancerrelated mortality. However, screening has also led to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of clinically insignificant tumors. Recently, certain national guidelines (eg, US Preventive Services Task Force) have recommended against PSA screening, which may lead to a reverse-stage migration. Although many prostate tumors are indolent at presentation, others are aggressive and are appropriate targets for treatment interventions. Utilization of molecular markers may improve our ability to measure tumor biology and allow better discrimination of indolent and aggressive tumors at diagnosis. Many emerging commercial molecular diagnostic assays have been designed to provide more accurate risk stratification for newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Unfamiliarity with molecular diagnostics may make it challenging for some clinicians to navigate and interpret the medical literature to ascertain whether particular assays are appropriately developed and validated for clinical use. Herein, the authors provide a framework for practitioners to use when assessing new tissue-based molecular assays. This review outlines aspects of assay development, clinical and analytic validation and clinical utility studies, and regulatory issues, which collectively determine whether tests (1) are actionable for specific clinical indications, (2) measurably influence treatment decisions, and (3) are sufficiently validated to warrant incorporation into clinical practice. [Rev Urol. 2014;16(4):172-180 doi: 10.3909/riu0644] © 2014 MedReviews®, LLC

Prostate cancerBiomarkerClinical utilityGenomic prostate scoreAdverse pathologyClinical validationMolecular diagnostics

Genomic testingView Articles