Active clinical trials for "Prostatic Neoplasms"

The generation of predictive models in radiotherapy has seen a significant increase. In 2017, Raymond published the largest systematic review of predictive prognostic models for biochemical relapse (BR), metastasis-free survival, and overall survival in patients with localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy (14), attempting to identify whether they were adequately developed and validated. He found 72 unique predictive models for external radiotherapy: 22 corresponding to BR risk, 20 corresponding to Cancer-Specific Survival, 10 corresponding to Overall Survival, and 20 for Disease/Metastasis-Free Survival detection. In his analysis, he highlighted a significant variation in the quality of these predictive models, understanding that they were developed prior to the existence of TRIPOD guidelines. In this regard, he pointed out that 54% of these models did not report their accuracy, and 61% of the models lacked validation (either internal or external). He also noted that they had limited follow-up (only 65% had follow-up beyond 5 years), that the treatment doses in these models were lower than current standards, and that the radiation techniques were different from current practices. Although in his final assessment, Raymond maintains that predictive models provide more certainty in predicting oncological outcomes than professional assessments, he considers it vital to validate these models for each population that wants to use them (the vast majority of these models are based on U.S. populations) or, even better, to generate predictive models specific to the local population while adhering to the TRIPOD guidelines. Probably due to the lack of validation in our patients for existing predictive models and/or the absence of predictive models originating from our population, in our routine clinical practice (Multidisciplinary Oncology Committees), phisycians do not apply any predictive models to patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer.

Background: Prostate biopsies are essential to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa). Transrectal prostate biopsies (TR-PB) are commonly performed, however disadvantages include the requirement of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) and higher complication rates than transperineal prostate biopsies (TP-PB). Guidelines still recommend the use of AP for TP-PB due to the limited evidence regarding complication rates after their omission. However, the rising rates of antibiotic resistance is of concern. The aim of this study was to compare the complication and detection rates of freehand TP-PB without AP versus TR-PB with AP. Methods: This single center retrospective study was performed in an academic hospital. TP-PB were introduced in 2019 and implemented as the main technique by late 2020. To compare the two techniques, data was collected for freehand TR-PB with AP between 2017-2018 and freehand TP-PB without AP between 2021-2022. The data from 2019 and 2020 were excluded to rule out the effects of the initial learning curve during the transition period. Primary outcome measure was post-biopsy complications occurring within 2 weeks, focusing on infectious complications. Secondary outcome measures were detection rates and upgrading/reclassification in the repeat biopsy in active surveillance (AS). Statistical analysis was performed using a Fisher exact or Chi-Squared test.

Dosimetry efficacy of the hydrogel spacer.

This is an observational study in which patient data from the past on men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer are studied. In observational studies, only observations are made without specified advice or interventions. Non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a type of cancer of the prostate that has not yet spread to other parts of the body, but that no longer responds adequately to initial hormone therapy/androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Androgens are male sex hormones such as testosterone. As they stimulate the growth of prostate cancer cells, low androgen levels are needed to reduce or slow the growth of these tumors. To reduce androgen levels in prostate cancer patients, the testes are removed through surgery or radiotherapy and subsequently androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is started. In men with nmCRPC, the cancer worsens despite low testosterone levels (also called castration resistant). This worsening is called "biochemical progression" as there is an increase in the blood level of cancer biomarkers, such as prostate specific antigen [PSA] without detectable disease. PSA is a protein that is made by both normal cells and by cancerous cells in the body. Thus, PSA levels can be taken as a marker for prostate cancer development. Men with nmCRPC usually have higher levels of PSA than normal. They are considered "high risk" if they show signs of quickly increasing PSA levels as this could mean that the tumor is growing and might spread to other parts of the body. Second generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) including Darolutamide, Apalutamide, and Enzalutamide are available for the treatment of nmCRPC in addition to ADT. SGARIs work by blocking androgens from attaching to proteins in cancer cells in the prostate. It is already known that men with nmCRPC benefit from these treatments, but as men with nmCRPC commonly have no symptoms, an important therapeutic goal is to minimize side effects which can impact the patients' quality of life and potentially lead to the patient stop the treatment. Comparative studies using data from the same database to show how treatment with Darolutamide, Apalutamide, and Enzalutamide differ from each other, are missing. In addition, there are only limited information regarding using Darolutamide, Apalutamide, and Enzalutamide in real-world settings. In this study data are collected from the same database to learn how Darolutamide, Enzalutamide and Apalutamide are used and how safe they are under real world conditions in men with nmCRPC, who had not been treated before with SGARI or another drug called abiraterone. The main purpose is to learn to what extent SGARI treatments are taken as prescribed. To find this out, the researchers will count the number of participants who have stopped their treatment with Darolutamide, Enzalutamide or Apalutamide at or before: 6 months 12 months 18 months of treatment in usual practice. In addition, characteristics of each participant group and the reason for discontinuation (stopping the treatment) will be collected and described. The researchers will also collect any medical problems during treatment and up to 30 days after stopping the treatment and that may or may not be related to the study treatment. These medical problems are also known as "adverse events" (AE). The data for this study will come from the US urology EMR ( Electronic Medical Record) database. This study will include all US patients identified in the Precision Point Specialty (PPS) urology electronic medical record (EMR) database between August 1, 2019 and September 30, 2021. The researchers will collect data from each patient for a minimum of 6 months after initiation of the SGARI treatment and up to the end of the study (March 31, 2022) or latest data cut available at the start of data extraction. There are no required visits in this study and treatment will not be influenced.

To investigate the effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on the intracerebral pressure (ICP) and intraocular pressure (IOP) in patients undergoing robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP)

Men with high risk prostate cancer who underwent radiotherapy of the prostate/seminal vesicles or underwent postoperative radiotherapy including pelvic lymph nodes between 2010 and 2016 are analyzed retrospectively. The aims are to estimate progression-free survival as well as toxicity according to CTCAE v4.03.

Through this study, the investigators seek to identify the benefits (improved survival) and harms (more procedures, more treatment, side effects, and quality-of-life impact) from different surveillance frequencies-every three vs. six vs. 12 months. Using the National Cancer Database and quality-of-life data from a large group of prostate cancer survivors, the investigators aim to compare survival, procedures/tests, treatments, and side effects in prostate cancer survivors who are followed with alternative surveillance frequencies and compare quality-of-life outcomes. The overall goal of the study is to provide high-quality data that will allow development of a personalized, risk-based tailored approach to post-treatment surveillance for prostate cancer.

This is a biopsy feasibility study in which patients with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) will be asked to donate primary and metastatic tumour tissue (both archival and de novo), blood samples, a urine specimen and clinical data for research.

The optimal number of prostate cores extracted during a prostate biopsy performed because of a suspected prostate cancer is still debated. The present consensus is to sample 12 cores. However, recent data published in the literature brought arguments in favour of a higher number, probably 20. This would have the advantages of decreasing the false negatives and the re-biopsy rate.

This study is a large observational study, set-up to observe how long-term treatment with FIRMAGON (hormone regulator) compare to other treatments in regards to cardiovascular events, changes in bone density, changes in blood sugar levels or liver enzyme levels in subjects with prostate cancer. Subjects will be treated according to their routine clinical care and not dictated by the study. As the study is observational in nature, the study will collect data relating to the events specified above. Subjects that agree to this study will be followed-up for 5 years. Subject data will be collected every 3 months for the first 2 years and every 6 months for the last 3 years.