暂无摘要。

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most widespread solid organ malignancy in males and ranks as the fifth leading cause of death globally. Identifying and treating men with clinically significant disease while avoiding the over-diagnosis and over-treatment of indolent disease remains a significant challenge. Several professional associations have developed guidelines on screening and early diagnosis of asymptomatic men with prostate-specific antigen testing. With recent updates from several large randomised prospective trials, the South African Urological Association and the Prostate Cancer Foundation of South Africa have developed these evidence-based recommendations to guide clinicians on PCa screening and early diagnosis for South African men.

BACKGROUND: Screening is not recommended for prostate cancer in the UK. Asymptomatic men aged ≥50 years can request a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test following counselling on potential harms and benefits. There are areas of clinical uncertainty among GPs, resulting in the content and quality of counselling varying.
OBJECTIVE: To produce a consensus that can influence guidelines for UK primary care on the optimal use of the PSA test in asymptomatic men for early prostate cancer detection.
METHODS: Prostate Cancer UK facilitated a RAND/UCLA consensus.
METHODS: Statements covering five topics were developed with a subgroup of experts. A panel of 15 experts in prostate cancer scored (round one) statements on a scale of one (strongly disagree) to nine (strongly agree). Panellists met to discuss statements before rescoring (round two). A lived experience panel of seven men scored a subset of statements with outcomes fed into the main panel.
RESULTS: Of the initial 94 statements reviewed by the expert panel, a final 48/85 (56%) achieved consensus. In the absence of screening, there was consensus on proactive approaches to initiate discussions about the PSA test with men who were at higher-than-average risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway may have reduced some of the harms associated with PSA testing; however, several areas of uncertainty remain in relation to screening, including optimal PSA thresholds for referral and intervals for retesting. There is consensus on proactive approaches to testing in higher-than-average risk groups. This should prompt a review of current guidelines.

Over a decade ago, the United States Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) recommended against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer in all men, which considerably influenced prostate cancer screening policies worldwide after that. Consequently, the world has seen increasing numbers of advanced stages and prostate cancer deaths, which later led the USPSTF to withdraw its initial statement. Meanwhile, the European Union has elaborated a directive to address the problem of implementing prostate cancer screening in \"Europe\'s Beating Cancer Plan\". In Switzerland, concerned urologists formed an open Swiss Prostate Cancer Screening Group to improve the early detection of prostate cancer. On the 20th of September 2023, during the annual general assembly of the Swiss Society of Urology (SGU/SSU) in Lausanne, members positively voted for a stepwise approach to evaluate the feasibility of implementing organised prostate cancer screening programs in Switzerland. The following article will summarise the events and scientific advances in the last decade during which evidence and promising additional modalities to complement PSA-based prostate cancer screening have emerged. It also aims to provide an overview of contemporary strategies and their potential harms and benefits.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

OBJECTIVE: To study prostate specific membrane antigen - positron emission tomography (Ga68PSMA-PETCT) based patterns of relapse at biochemical failure (BCF) after prostate-only radiotherapy (PORT) in high-risk (HR) prostate cancer and its implications on pelvic contouring recommendations.
METHODS: Patients with clinico-radiological high-risk node-negative prostate cancer treated with curative PORT and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), either within the POP-RT randomised trial or off trial, who underwent a Ga68PSMA-PETCT upon BCF were included. Patterns of regional and distant recurrence on Ga68PSMA-PETCT were studied. Pelvic nodal recurrences were mapped with reference to the superior border of pubic symphysis. Pelvic lymph nodal caudal border (PLNcb) recommendations in the published contouring guidelines (RTOGcb, GETUGcb, PIVOTALcb, NRGcb, GFRUcb) were evaluated.
RESULTS: Of the total 262 patients screened, 68 eligible patients were included (POP-RT trial 35 patients; off-trial 33 patients). Median follow-up was 91 months (IQR, 72-117) and median time to BCF was 65 months (IQR, 49-83). Regional and distant recurrence was seen in 31 (46%) and 31 (46%) patients, respectively. Of the nodal recurrences, nearly half (46%, 14/31) had no distant metastases and 64% (20/31) had a failure in the common iliac nodal region. The lower-most nodal recurrence was 20 mm cranial to the top of pubic symphysis (RTOGcb, GETUGcb, GFRUcb) and 10 mm cranial to the PIVOTALcb. The PLNcb recommended by NRG guideline (NRGcb) had an inter-patient variability of 32 mm, ranging from 16 mm above to 16 mm below the top of pubic symphysis, and the lower most nodal recurrence ranged from 4 mm to 36 mm cranial to NRGcb.
CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic failures accounted for a major proportion of recurrences after prostate-only radiotherapy, with the caudal most nodal recurrence being 20 mm cranial to the top of pubic symphysis. This could have implications in defining the caudal border of contouring recommendations.

This cross-sectional study examines the association of life expectancy and prostate cancer screening practices among older males using data from a national survey.

UNASSIGNED: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part I of a three-part series focusing on treatment decision-making at the time of suspected biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic BCR after RP and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis.
UNASSIGNED: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles.
UNASSIGNED: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease.
UNASSIGNED: Advancing work in the area of diagnostic tools (particularly imaging), biomarkers, radiation delivery, and biological manipulation with the evolving armamentarium of therapeutic agents will undoubtedly present new opportunities for patients to experience long-term control of their cancer while minimizing toxicity.

UNASSIGNED: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part III of a three-part series focusing on evaluation and management of suspected non-metastatic recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, evaluation and management of regional recurrence, management for molecular imaging metastatic recurrence, and future directions. Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part II for discussion of treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP).
UNASSIGNED: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles.
UNASSIGNED: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Guideline Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease.
UNASSIGNED: Continuous and deliberate efforts for multidisciplinary care in prostate cancer will be required to optimize and improve the oncologic and functional outcomes of patients treated with salvage therapies in the future.

UNASSIGNED: The summary presented herein covers recommendations on salvage therapy for recurrent prostate cancer intended to facilitate care decisions and aid clinicians in caring for patients who have experienced a recurrence following prior treatment with curative intent. This is Part II of a three-part series focusing on treatment delivery for non-metastatic biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary radical prostatectomy (RP). Please refer to Part I for discussion of treatment decision-making and Part III for discussion of evaluation and management of recurrence after radiotherapy (RT) and focal therapy, regional recurrence, and oligometastasis.
UNASSIGNED: The systematic review that informs this Guideline was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 21, 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through August 2022), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through August 2022). Update searches were conducted on July 26, 2023. Searches were supplemented by reviewing electronic database reference lists of relevant articles.
UNASSIGNED: In a collaborative effort between AUA, ASTRO, and SUO, the Salvage Therapy for Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance for the care of patients who experience BCR after initial definitive local therapy for clinically localized disease.
UNASSIGNED: Optimizing and personalizing the approach to salvage therapy remains an ongoing area of work in the field of genitourinary oncology and represents an area of research and clinical care that requires well-coordinated, multi-disciplinary efforts.