PurposeTo evaluate change in quality of life (QoL) and symptoms in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) in conditions of current clinical practice.MethodsProspective, longitudinal, multicenter open-label study was carried out in urology outpatient clinics. Patients were ≥40 years of age with an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) score ≥8. QoL and symptoms were measured at baseline and 6 months using the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Impact Index (BII) and the IPSS.Results1713 patients were included for analysis. Mean (SD) IPSS and BII scores at baseline were 16.8 (5.4) and 6.8 (2.6), respectively. 8.9 % (n = 153) of study participants did not receive treatment (watchful waiting, WW), 70.3 % (n = 1204) were prescribed monotherapy (alpha-adrenergic blockers [AB]; phytotherapy [PT, of which 95.2 % was the hexanic extract of Serenoa repens, HESr]; or 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors [5ARI]), and 20.8 % (n = 356) received combined treatment (AB + 5ARI; AB + HESr; others). At 6 months, improvements in QoL were similar across the different medical treatment (MT) groups, both for monotherapy (AB: mean improvement [SD] of 2.4 points [2.4]; PT: 1.9 [2.4]; 5ARI: 2.5 [2.3]) and combined therapy (AB + 5ARI: 3.1 [2.9]; AB + PT: 3.1 [2.5]). There were no clinically significant differences between MT groups and all showed significant improvement over WW (p < 0.05). HESr showed similar efficacy to AB and 5ARI both as monotherapy and in combination with AB. Results on the IPSS were similar.ConclusionsImprovements in QoL and symptoms were equivalent across the medical treatments most widely used in real-life practice to manage patients with moderate or severe LUTS. HESr showed an equivalent efficacy to AB and 5ARI with fewer side effects.
The incidence of bladder cancer in Spain, age adjusted to the standard European population, confirms that Spain has one of the highest incidences in Europe. Most primary nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer corresponded to high risk patients but with a low detected incidence of carcinoma in situ.
DISCLAIMER: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our subscribers we are providing this early version of the article. The paper will be copy edited and typeset, and proof will be reviewed before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to The Journal pertain. Embargo Policy All article content is under embargo until uncorrected proof of the article becomes available online. We will provide journalists and editors with full-text copies of the articles in question prior to the embargo date so that stories can be adequately researched and written. The standard embargo time is 12:01 AM ET on that date. Questions regarding embargo should be directed to
To investigate whether tamsulosin (TAM) and the hexanic extract of Serenoa repens (HESr) are more effective in combination than as monotherapy in men with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Subset analysis of data from a 6-month, multicenter observational study. Patients received either tamsulosin (0.4 mg/day) or HESr (320 mg/day) alone or in combination. Primary endpoints were change in symptoms and quality of life. Tolerability was also assessed. Seven hundred and nine patients were available for intention to treat (ITT) analysis, 263 treated with tamsulosin, 262 with HESr, and 184 with TAM + HESr. After 6 months, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) scores improved by a mean (standard deviation) of 7.2 (5.0) points in the TAM + HESr group compared to 5.7 (4.3) points with TAM alone and 5.4 (4.6) points with HESr (p < 0.001). Quality of life showed greatest improvement with combination therapy (p < 0.02). Adverse effects were reported by 1.9% of patients receiving HESr, 13.3% receiving TAM, and 12.0% receiving TAM + HESr (p < 0.001). In men with moderate/severe LUTS/BPH, combination treatment with TAM + HESr produced more effective symptom relief and greater improvement in quality of life than with either treatment alone, with acceptable tolerability.
Objectives: This study aimed to externally validate the diagnostic accuracy of the Select MDx test for Significant prostate cancer (Sig PCa) (ISUP > 1), in a contemporaneous, prospective, multicenter cohort with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) between 3 and 10 ng/ml and a non-suspicious digital rectal examination.Methods and Participants: For all enrolled patients, the Select Mdx test, the risk calculator ERSPC3 + DRE, and a prostatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were carried out. Subsequently, a systematic 12-core trans-rectal biopsy and a targeted biopsy, in the case of a prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PIRADS) > 2 lesion (max three lesions), were performed. To assess the accuracy of the Select MDx test in the detection of clinically Sig PCa, the test sensitivity was evaluated.Secondary objectives were specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and area under the curve (AUC). A direct comparison with the ERSPC + DRE risk calculator and MRI were also performed. We also studied the predictive ability to diagnose Sig PCa from the combination of the Select MDx test with MRI using clinical decision-curve analysis.Results: There were 163 patients enrolled after meeting the inclusion criteria and study protocol. The Select MDx test showed a sensitivity of 76.9% (95% CI, 63.2-87.5), 49.6% specificity (95% CI, 39.9-59.2), 82.09% (95% CI, 70.8-90.4) NPV, and 41.67% (95% CI, 31.7-52.2) PPV for the diagnosis of Sig PCa. COR analysis was also performed, which showed an AUC of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71). There were no differences in the accuracy of Select MDx, ERSPC + DRE, or MRI. The combination
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.