Recommendations for managing clinically localized prostate cancer are structured around clinical risk criteria, with prostate biopsy (PB) Gleason score (GS) being the most important factor. Biopsy to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen upgrading/downgrading is well described, and is often the rationale for costly imaging or genomic studies. We present simple, no-cost analyses of clinical parameters to predict which GS 6 and GS 8 patients will change to GS 7 at prostatectomy. From May 2006 to December 2012, 1590 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). After exclusions, we identified a GS 6 cohort of 374 patients and a GS 8 cohort of 91 patients. During this era, >1000 additional patients were enrolled in an active surveillance (AS) program. For GS 6, 265 (70.9%) of 374 patients were upgraded, and the cohort included 183 (48.9%) patients eligible for AS by the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance Study (PRIAS) standards, of which 57.9% were upgraded. PB features that predicted a >90% chance of upgrading included ≥ 7 cores positive, maximum foci length ≥ 8 mm in any core, and total tumor involvement ≥ 30%. For GS 8, downgrading occurred in 46 (50.5%), which was significantly higher for single core versus multiple cores (80.4% vs 19.6%, P = 0.011). Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurred in 3.4% of GS 6 upgraded versus 0% nonupgraded, and in GS 8, 19.6% downgraded versus 42.2% nondowngraded. In counseling men with clinically localized prostate cancer, the odds of GS change should be presented, and certain men with high-volume GS 6 or low-volume GS 8 can be counseled with GS 7-based recommendations.

No abstract available.
Humans ; Lymphocyte Count/*methods ; Male ; Neutrophils/*pathology ; *Spermatic Cord Torsion ; *Testis

PURPOSE: To evaluate the predictive role of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), mean platelet volume (MPV), and platelet count (PLT) in the diagnosis of testicular torsion (TT) and testicular viability following TT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed two study groups in this retrospective study: 75 patients with a diagnosis of TT (group 1) and 56 age-matched healthy subjects (group 2). We performed a complete blood count as a part of the diagnostic procedure, and NLR, PLR, MPV, and PLT values were recorded. We compared the patient and control groups in terms of these parameters. Then, TT patients were divided into two subgroups according to the time elapsed since the onset of symptoms. Subsequently, we evaluated the relationship between the duration of symptoms and these parameters. RESULTS: There were significant differences between groups 1 and 2 in NLR, PLR, and PLT (p<0.001 for all). There was no predictive role of MPV in the diagnosis of TT (p=0.328). We determined significantly high sensitivity and specificity levels for NLR in the prediction of TT diagnosis (84% and 92%, respectively). Furthermore, NLR was significantly related to the duration of symptoms in TT patients (p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: NLR may be a useful parameter in the diagnosis of TT. Furthermore, NLR may be used as a predictive factor for testicular viability following TT.
Adolescent ; Humans ; Lymphocyte Count/*methods ; Male ; Neutrophils/*pathology ; Platelet Count/methods ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prognosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; *Spermatic Cord Torsion/blood/diagnosis/physiopathology ; Symptom Assessment/methods ; *Testis/pathology/physiopathology ; Tissue Survival ; Turkey

In recent years, it has come a long way in the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of prostate cancer. Beside this, it was argued that definitive treatments could cause overtreatment, particularly in the very low, low, and favorable risk group. When alternative treatment and follow-up methods are being considered for this group of patients, active surveillance is seen as a good alternative for patients with very low and low-risk groups in this era. However, it has become necessary to find other alternatives for patients in the favorable risk group or patients who cannot adopt active follow-up. In the light of technological developments, the concept of focal therapy was introduced with the intensification of research to treat only the lesioned area instead of treating the entire organ for prostate lesions though there are not many publications about many of them yet. According to the initial results, it was understood that the results could be good if the appropriate focal therapy technique was applied to the appropriate patient. Thus, focal therapies have begun to find their "middle ground" place between definitive therapies and active follow-up.

Recommendations for managing clinically localized prostate cancer are structured around clinical risk criteria, with prostate biopsy (PB) Gleason score (GS) being the most important factor. Biopsy to radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen upgrading/downgrading is well described, and is often the rationale for costly imaging or genomic studies. We present simple, no-cost analyses of clinical parameters to predict which GS 6 and GS 8 patients will change to GS 7 at prostatectomy. From May 2006 to December 2012, 1590 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). After exclusions, we identified a GS 6 cohort of 374 patients and a GS 8 cohort of 91 patients. During this era, >1000 additional patients were enrolled in an active surveillance (AS) program. For GS 6, 265 (70.9%) of 374 patients were upgraded, and the cohort included 183 (48.9%) patients eligible for AS by the Prostate Cancer Research International Active Surveillance Study (PRIAS) standards, of which 57.9% were upgraded. PB features that predicted a >90% chance of upgrading included ≥ 7 cores positive, maximum foci length ≥ 8 mm in any core, and total tumor involvement ≥ 30%. For GS 8, downgrading occurred in 46 (50.5%), which was significantly higher for single core versus multiple cores (80.4% vs 19.6%, P = 0.011). Biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurred in 3.4% of GS 6 upgraded versus 0% nonupgraded, and in GS 8, 19.6% downgraded versus 42.2% nondowngraded. In counseling men with clinically localized prostate cancer, the odds of GS change should be presented, and certain men with high-volume GS 6 or low-volume GS 8 can be counseled with GS 7-based recommendations.
Biopsy ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Grading/statistics & numerical data* ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology* ; Prostate/surgery* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Prostatectomy ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity