EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer—2020 Update. Part 1: Screening,Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

ObjectiveTo present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).Evidence acquisitionThe panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2016 and 2020. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.Evidence synthesisA risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. Risk-adapted screening should be offered to men at increased risk from the age of 45 yr and to breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, who have been confirmed to be at risk of early and aggressive disease (mainly BRAC2), from around 40 yr of age. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is performed, a combination of targeted and systematic biopsies must be offered. There is currently no place for the routine use of tissue-based biomarkers. Whilst prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography is the most sensitive staging procedure, the lack of outcome benefit remains a major limitation. Active surveillance (AS) should always be discussed with low-risk patients, as well as with selected intermediate-risk patients with favourable International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the AS journey and the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A strong recommendation to consider moderate hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term hormonal treatment.ConclusionsThe evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2020 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for their use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.Patient summaryUpdated prostate cancer guidelines are presented, addressing screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. These guidelines rely on the available scientific evidence, and new insights will need to be considered and included on a regular basis. In some cases, the supporting evidence for new treatment options is not yet strong enough to provide a recommendation, which is why continuous updating is important. Patients must be fully informed of all relevant options and, together with their treating physicians, decide on the most optimal management for them.     

Diagnostic accuracy of laboratory and ultrasound findings in patients with a non-visualized appendix

Ultrasound (US) and laboratory testing are initial diagnostic tests for acute appendicitis. A diagnostic dilemma develops when the appendix is not visualized on US. Objective: To determine if specific US findings and/or laboratory results predict acute appendicitis when the appendix is not visualized. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on children (birth-18?yrs) presenting to the pediatric emergency department with suspected acute appendicitis who underwent right lower quadrant US.Children with previous appendectomy, US at another facility, or eloped were excluded. US findings analyzed: inflammatory changes, right lower quadrant and lower abdominal fluid, tenderness during US exam and lymph nodes. Diagnoses were confirmed via surgical pathology. Results 1252 subjects were enrolled, 60.8% (762) had appendix visualized and 39.1% (490) did not. In children where the appendix was not seen, 6.7% [33] were diagnosed with appendicitis. Among patients with a non-visualized appendix, the likelihood of appendicitis was significantly greater if: inflammatory changes in the RLQ (OR 18.0, 95% CI 4.5–72.1), CRP >0.5?mg/dL (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.0–6.8), or WBC?>?10 (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.66–11.58). Duration of abdominal pain >3?days was significantly less likely associated with appendicitis in this model (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.003–0.395). Combined, the absence inflammatory changes, CRP?<?0.5?mg/dL, WBC?<?10, and pain, ≤3?days had a NPV of 94.0%. Conclusion When the appendix is not visualized on US, predictors for appendicitis include the presence of inflammatory changes in the RLQ, an elevated WBC/CRP and abdominal pain <3?days.     

Patterns of relapse after successful completion of initial therapy in primary central nervous system lymphoma: a case series

Journal of Neuro-Oncology - Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a subtype of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma that involves the brain, spinal cord, or leptomeninges, without evidence of...     

Maximizing Breast Cancer Therapy with Awareness of Potential Treatment-Related Blood Disorders

In this review we summarize the impact of the various modalities of breast cancer therapy coupled with intrinsic patient factors on incidence of subsequent treatment-induced myelodysplasia and acute myelogenous leukemia (t-MDS/AML). It is clear that risk is increased for patients treated with radiation and chemotherapy at younger ages. Radiation is associated with modest risk, whereas chemotherapy, particularly the combination of an alkylating agent and an anthracycline, carries higher risk and radiation and chemotherapy combined increase the risk markedly. Recently, treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), but not pegylated G-CSF, has been identified as a factor associated with increased t-MDS/AML risk. Two newly identified associations may link homologous DNA repair gene deficiency and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment to increased t-MDS/AML risk. When predisposing factors, such as young age, are combined with an increasing number of potentially leukemogenic treatments that may not confer large risk singly, the risk of t-MDS/AML appears to increase. Patient and treatment factors combine to form a biological cascade that can trigger a myelodysplastic event. Patients with breast cancer are often exposed to many of these risk factors in the course of their treatment, and triple-negative patients, who are often younger and/or BRCA positive, are often exposed to all of them. It is important going forward to identify effective therapies without these adverse associated effects and choose existing therapies that minimize the risk of t-MDS/AML without sacrificing therapeutic gain.

Implications for Practice

Breast cancer is far more curable than in the past but requires multimodality treatment. Great care must be taken to use the least leukemogenic treatment programs that do not sacrifice efficacy. Elimination of radiation and anthracycline/alkylating agent regimens will be helpful where possible, particularly in younger patients and possibly those with homologous repair deficiency (HRD). Use of colony-stimulating factors should be limited to those who truly require them for safe chemotherapy administration. Further study of a possible leukemogenic association with HRD and the various forms of colony-stimulating factors is badly needed.