Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) needs to be monitored with ultrasensitive PSA assays (uPSAs) for oncologists to be able to start salvage radiotherapy (SRT) while PSA is <0.5 µg/L for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) relapsing after a radical prostatectomy (RP). Our systematic review (SR) aimed to summarize uPSAs for patients with localized PCa. The SR was registered as InPLASY2023110084. We searched for studies on Google Scholar, PUBMED and reference lists of reviews and studies. We only included studies on uPSAs published in English and excluded studies of women, animals, sarcoidosis and reviews. Of the 115 included studies, 39 reported PSA assay methods and 76 reported clinical findings. Of 67,479 patients, 14,965 developed PSA recurrence (PSAR) and 2663 died. Extremely low PSA nadir and early developments of PSA separated PSAR-prone from non-PSAR-prone patients (cumulative p value 3.7 × 1012). RP patients with the lowest post-surgery PSA nadir and patients who had the lowest PSA at SRT had the fewest deaths. In conclusion, PSA for patients with localized PCa in the pre-PSAR phase of PCa is strongly associated with later PSAR and survival. A rising but still exceedingly low PSA at SRT predicts a good 5-year overall survival.

UNASSIGNED: To identify barriers and facilitators of the implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) on PSA testing in primary care.
UNASSIGNED: Systematic review of articles.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science.
UNASSIGNED: Original studies published in English or Spanish that assessed the barriers to and facilitators of SDM before PSA testing in primary care were included. No time restrictions were applied.
UNASSIGNED: Two review authors screened the titles, abstracts and full texts for inclusion, and assessed the quality of the included studies. A thematic synthesis of the results were performed and developed a framework. Quality assessment of the studies was based on three checklists: STROBE for quantitative cross-sectional studies, GUIDED for intervention studies and SRQR for qualitative studies.
UNASSIGNED: The search returned 431 articles, of which we included 13: five cross-sectional studies, two intervention studies, five qualitative studies and one mixed methods study. The identified barriers included lack of time (healthcare professionals), lack of knowledge (healthcare professionals and patients), and preestablished beliefs (patients). The identified facilitators included decision-making training for professionals, education for patients and healthcare professionals, and dissemination of information.
UNASSIGNED: SDM implementation in primary care seems to be a recent field. Many of the barriers identified are modifiable, and the facilitators can be leveraged to strengthen the implementation of SDM.

Prostate cancer has an indolent progression course and commonly metastasizes to the vertebrae bone and regional lymph nodes. We report a patient with prostate cancer who has developed cutaneous metastases in multiple regions, including the right infraclavicular and abdominal area, as well as the left supraclavicular region. It presented as isolated, prominent nodules that were microscopically proven to be of prostate adenocarcinoma when biopsied. This rare presentation is a marker of an advanced disease course with a poor prognosis in castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Thorough clinical examination to rule out metastasis from the prostate and other dermatological conditions is paramount as well as ensuring early detection and optimizing patient outcomes.

Metastatic prostate cancer is a common diagnosis with a protracted but terminal course. Gastrointestinal (GI) tract involvement is extremely rare, and reportedly portends a poor prognosis. It can present years after the initial prostate cancer diagnosis. Only fifteen cases of prostate cancer metastasis to the stomach have been reported in the literature. We report a case of a 72-year-old man with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and extensive bony involvement. He presented a decade after the diagnosis of prostate cancer with signs of heartburn; a gastric biopsy was initially believed to represent primary gastric carcinoma, but subsequently a diagnosis of prostate cancer metastatic to the stomach was confirmed. This case highlights the importance of the provision of a pertinent clinical history and clinical differential diagnosis at the time of submission of surgical pathology specimens, as well as highlighting the need to have a low index of suspicion to pursue additional pathologic markers whenever a presumed second adenocarcinoma is noted in the context of a patient having a history of current or prior advanced-stage adenocarcinoma of another site. The correct diagnosis can shield the patient from the morbidity of inappropriate surgical or medical management.

Prostate cancer is one of the malignancies that affects men and significantly contributes to increased mortality rates in men globally. Patients affected with prostate cancer present with either a localized or advanced disease. In this review, we aim to provide a holistic overview of prostate cancer, including the diagnosis of the disease, mutations leading to the onset and progression of the disease, and treatment options. Prostate cancer diagnoses include a digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen analysis, and prostate biopsies. Mutations in certain genes are linked to the onset, progression, and metastasis of the cancer. Treatment for localized prostate cancer encompasses active surveillance, ablative radiotherapy, and radical prostatectomy. Men who relapse or present metastatic prostate cancer receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), salvage radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Currently, available treatment options are more effective when used as combination therapy; however, despite available treatment options, prostate cancer remains to be incurable. There has been ongoing research on finding and identifying other treatment approaches such as the use of traditional medicine, the application of nanotechnologies, and gene therapy to combat prostate cancer, drug resistance, as well as to reduce the adverse effects that come with current treatment options. In this article, we summarize the genes involved in prostate cancer, available treatment options, and current research on alternative treatment options.

Objective: To address the question of whether antibiotic therapy can obviate the need for prostate biopsy (PBx) in patients presenting with high prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Methods: With the increase in unnecessary PBx in men with high PSA levels, a systematic review was performed according to the Cochrane Reviews guidelines and in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Results: The literature search yielded 42 studies, of which 11 were excluded due to irrelevance of data. Most of the studies were retrospective, nine studies were randomised controlled trials, and there were seven prospective non-randomised trials. The age range of the patients was 51-95 years. Antibiotics, predominantly ofloxacin or ciprofloxacin, combined with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) or not, were prescribed for 2-8 weeks. All studies focussed on PSA levels ranging from ≤ 4 to ≥ 10 ng/mL. Furthermore, antibiotic therapy normalised PSA levels by a wide variety of percentages (16-59%), and the PSA level decrease also varied widely and ranged from 17% to 80%. For patients who had unchanged or decreased PSA, carcinoma was found in 40-52% and 7.7-20.3%, respectively. No cancer was detected if the PSA level decreased to < 4 ng/mL. Conclusion: Antibiotic therapy is clinically beneficial in patients with high PSA levels. PSA reduction or normalisation after medical therapy, either antibiotic and/or NSAID, for ≥ 2 weeks can avoid unnecessary PBx. Antibiotic therapy is more beneficial when the PSA level is < 20 ng/mL. Abbreviations: EPS: expressed prostatic secretion; PBx: prostate biopsy; (%f)(f/t)(t)PSA, (percentage free) (free/total) (total) serum PSA; PSAD: PSA density; RCT: randomised controlled trial; VB3: voided bladder urine 3.

Background Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains as the most used biomarker in the detection of early prostate cancer (PCa). Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are produced to facilitate incorporation of evidence into clinical practice. This is particularly useful when PCa screening remains controversial and guidelines diverge among different medical institutions, although opportunistic screening is not recommended. Methods We performed a systematic review of guidelines about PCa screening using PSA. Guidelines published since 2008 were included in this study. The most updated version of these CPGs was used for the evaluation. Results Twenty-two guidelines were selected for review. In 59% of these guidelines, recommendations were graded according to level of evidence (n = 13), but only 18% of the guidelines provided clear algorithms (n = 4). Each CPG was assessed using a checklist of laboratory issues, including pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical factors. We found that laboratory medicine specialists participate in 9% of the guidelines reviewed (n = 2) and laboratory issues were frequently omitted. We remarked that information concerning the consequences of World Health Organization (WHO) standard in PSA testing was considered by only two of 22 CPGs evaluated in this study. Conclusions We concluded that the quality of PCa early detection guidelines could be improved properly considering the laboratory issues in their development.

BACKGROUND: Aldo-keto reductase 1C3 (AKR1C3) is an important oxidoreductase with multiple substrates, that are involved in producing extra-testicular androgens. Its activity is influenced by environmental exposures, as well as by genetic variants. These genetic variants could therefore produce variable testosterone levels and subsequent androgen receptor (AR) activation. This could lead to differential downstream production of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA). As PSA level is used for clinical evaluation of the prostate, these variations could impact prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis, as well as PC management outcomes. This review brings together information with regards to key functions of this enzyme, its relevance in PC, its transcriptional regulation, clinical aspects associated with genetics, differential regulation in cancer and cancer progression, and the types of AKR1C3 inhibitors with future therapeutic value.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these discussions, hypotheses are forwarded for future applicability of this enzyme and its genetic variants in transformational medical practices in PC. Options for the use of personalised AKR1C3 inhibitor drugs for late stage PC are also discussed.