Artículo especiAl P rostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in men over 50 y in Mexico. In 2015, 41 210 cancer deaths are expected among men, 6 801 of which will be from PC.1 Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has been applied as a useful marker for the early diagnosis and monitoring of PC. A randomized study in Europe demonstrated a progressive decrease in prostate cancer mortality, with a 51% reduction in individuals up to 75 years old who underwent screening.2 As there is no malignant tumor follow-up registry Prostate cancerRicardo Alonso Castillejos-Molina, MD, (1) Fernando Bernardo Gabilondo-Navarro, MD, Urol.(1,2)(1) Instituto Nacional AbstractProstate cancer is the most frequent tumor found in men worldwide and in Mexico in particular. Age and family history are the main risk factors. The diagnosis is made by prostate biopsy in patients with abnormalities detected in their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels or digital rectal exam (DRE). This article reviews screening and diagnostic methods as well as treatment options for patients diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Spanish version of the USSQ is appropriate for assessing the symptoms associated with ureteral stent in the Spanish-speaking population. The ureteral catheter significantly affects the various aspects of life in this population.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based early detection for prostate cancer is the subject of intense debate. Implementation of organized prostate cancer screening has been challenging, in part because the PSA test is so amenable to opportunistic screening. To the extent that access to cancer screening tests increases in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is an urgent need to thoughtfully evaluate existing and future cancer screening strategies to ensure benefit and control costs. We used Mexico's prostate cancer screening efforts to illustrate the challenges LMICs face. We provide five considerations for policymakers for a smarter approach and implementation of PSA-based screening.

Purpose:To provide data of the incidence and management of common urological malignancies in renal transplant recipients.Materials and Methods:We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospective database from August 1967 to August 2015. A descriptive analysis of the sample was performed.Results:Among 1256 consecutive RTR a total of 88 patients developed malignancies (7%). There were 18 genitourinary tumors in the 16 patients (20.45 % of all malignant neoplasms), incidence of 1.27%. The most common neoplasm encounter was renal cancer (38.8%), followed by urothelial carcinoma (33.3%). Median follow-up of transplantation was 197 months (R, 36-336). Mean time from RT to cancer diagnosis 89±70 months (R, 12-276). CsA and AZA was the most common immunosuppression regimen in 68.75%. Mean follow-up after diagnosis was 103±72 months (R 10-215). Recurrence free survival rate of 100%. Overall survival of 89.5% of the sample; there were two non-related cancer deaths during follow-up.Conclusions:The incidence of neoplasms in RTR was lower than in other series, with favorable functional and oncologic results after treatment. This suggests that actions to reduce the risk of these malignancies as well as a strict follow-up are mandatory for an early detection and treatment.

Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) of Bellini is a rare variant of renal cell carcinoma. It tends to be more aggressive when locally advanced or when having distant spread on diagnosis. The only favorable prognosis factor is low-stage, low-grade, with disease-free survival reported up to 5 years. We reviewed our renal cell carcinoma database and found 2 cases of CDC, namely 1 young female with locally advanced disease with supraclavicular metastasis and a dismissal prognosis, and 1 male with localized disease with 10-year disease-free survival.