Objective: Tamsulosin is often administered at a dose of 0.2 mg in Japan, Korea, and elsewhere in Asia, while a dose of 0.4 mg is more common in the West. In order to determine the higher dose might also be appropriate in the North-East Asian setting, we studied whether the effect of increasing the dose to 0.4 mg in Japanese patients who had dysuria associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia.Patients and Methods: Twenty-two cases with a voiding volume ≥ 100 ml assessed by uroflowmetry out of 31 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and an IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) ≥ 8 whose symptoms were controlled with 0.2 mg of tamsulosin were entered into this study. We evaluated IPSS and QOL (quality of life) score, urinary flow parameters and residual urine volume before and 4 weeks after increasing the dose of tamsulosin.Results: Statistical analyses performed using the Wilcoxon test showed no significant alteration in IPSS total score or QOL score with the increased dose, but Qmax (maximum urinary flow rate) improved from 10.1 ± 5.5 ml/s to 12.1 ± 6.5 ml/s (p = 0.013), and residual urine volume improved from 37.6 ± 26.4 ml to 22.2 ± 24.3 ml (p = 0.012). Two of the 31 patients complained of new symptoms; 1 complained of breast pain and the other complained of dizziness.Conclusions: From the lack of side effects of more than moderate grade in the present study, increasing the dose of tamsulosin might be recommended before switching patients to other drugs.

A 20-year-old man was admitted to our hospital with persistent cough and dyspnea. He had bilateral distention of the jugular veins, and swollen lymph nodes were palpable in the right subclavicular region. Plain X-ray and computed tomography (CT) of the chest showed a solid soft tissue mass in the upper mediastinum, with leftward displacement of the trachea and complete obstruction of the superior vena cava. Mediastinal radiotherapy (1.8 Gy/day) and methylprednisolone (100 mg/day) were started immediately. Biopsy of the right subclavicular lymph nodes revealed metastatic seminoma. The patient was referred for chemotherapy, which was performed with a combination of cisplatin, bleomycin and etoposide (BEP). A partial response was observed after completion of 3 cycles of chemotherapy, but there was no further tumor shrinkage after additional salvage chemotherapy. The patient is being followed up on an outpatient basis and has been free of recurrence for 32 months after intensive treatment.

Background: We evaluated the effectiveness of gemcitabine and paclitaxel therapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma for whom two lines of sequential chemotherapy had been unsuccessful.

Methods: A total number of 105 patients who had previously received first-line chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine and cisplatin or carboplatin, were treated with second-line gemcitabine and docetaxel therapy between June 2006 and May 2015. Of these patients, 15 with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0 or 1 were administered gemcitabine and paclitaxel as third-line treatment from 2013 after failure of the second-line therapy. For each 21-day cycle, gemcitabine (1000 mg/m²) was administered on days 1, 8, and 15, and paclitaxel (200 mg/m²) on day 1. Patients were assessed for each cycle and any adverse events were noted. Furthermore, a Short Form Health Survey questionnaire was used to assess each patient’s quality of life.

Results: Third-line gemcitabine and paclitaxel treatment cycles were undertaken for a median of four times (range 2–9). The disease control rate was 80.0%. After second-line gemcitabine and docetaxel therapy was completed, median progression-free survival and median overall survival were determined as 9.8 and 13.0 months, respectively. The only prognostic factor for overall survival, as determined by univariate and multivariate analyses, was third-line gemcitabine and paclitaxel therapy. Neutropenia (66.7%) and thrombocytopenia (53.3%) were noted as the grade 3 treatment-related toxicities. After two cycles of third-line gemcitabine and paclitaxel therapy, the pre- and post-treatment quality of life scores did not differ significantly.

Conclusions: Results demonstrate that third-line combination therapy using gemcitabine and paclitaxel is a feasible option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients.