OBJECTIVES

To create a pilot urologic malignancy registry using demographic and clinical data of a cohort of patients newly diagnosed to have urologic malignancies in the year 2021.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study conducted in four study sites: National Kidney and Transplant Institute, East Avenue Medical Center, UP-Philippine General Hospital and Batangas Medical Center

RESULTS

A total of 243 patients with newly diagnosed urologic cancers were enrolled. The median age was 61 years, with a wide range of 1 to 87 years. Most of the patients (81.47%) were male, while there were 45 females (18.52%) who had either urinary bladder, kidney or upper urothelial cancer. The most common type of malignancy was prostate cancer (34.57%), followed by kidney cancer (30.04%) and urinary bladder cancer (24.69%), consistent with the currently observed worldwide incidence. There were also 3 patients (1.23%) noted with multiple primaries. More than half of the patients (63.37%) received surgery as active treatment. After the two-year follow-up period, thirteen patients (5.35%) developed progressive disease, and 14 patients (5.76%) died.

CONCLUSION

This urologic cancer registry represents the first multi-center, investigator-initiated epidemiologic study of its kind in the Philippines. As a proof-of-concept (POC) project, it demonstrates the feasibility of establishing a national database capturing baseline data on the country’s most common urologic malignancies.

Cohort Studies ; Multiple Chronic Conditions ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; General Surgery ; Epidemiology

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical benefit of Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA + P) withandrogen deprivation therapy in patients with metastatic prostate cancer as a local experience in thePhilippines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors evaluated retrospectively a case series of seven patients receivingandrogen deprivation therapy with high-risk metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC)and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with AA + P in a tertiary hospitalfrom April 2019 to October 2020. Disease characteristics, biochemical trend, quality of life evaluationusing the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire (EORTCQLQ-C30 v.3), and adverse events reporting using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) Version 5.0 were all retrieved from the medical records as outcome measures. RESULTS: Analysis of 18 months period using chart review was done. Five patients showed clinicalimprovement on positive PSA response. Patients also presented with Grade 1-2 adverse events scorebased on CTCAE including hypertension, hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal symptoms, and electrolyteimbalances. Using the EORTC QLQ-C30 v.3 showed that AA + P provided significant improvementon the overall quality of life, functioning in terms of role, emotional, cognitive and social aspectswith reasonable safety profile and minimal adverse events limited to worsening of gastrointestinalsymptoms from baseline. CONCLUSION The addition of AA + P to androgen deprivation therapy is a suitable option for bothhigh-risk mCSPC and mCRPC exhibiting a significant biochemical, functional and quality of lifeimprovement with reasonable safety profile and limited adverse events in the ‘real-world’ setting, whichis comparable with the findings in other similar studies.

Objective: The information gathered by the various stone analysis reports is valuable to both the urologist and the patient. The study aimed to compare a urinary stone analysis devise kit and determine its sensitivity and specificity with the chemico-quantitative analysis offered by another tertiary hospital. Materials and Methods: A total of 25 urinary stone samples were collected from patients seen in a government chartered tertiary hospital from January to September 2009. The stones were submitted to the study's qualitative stone analysis and for the chemico-quantitative analysis. Results: The two analyses have identical results in reporting for the presence of oxalates and phosphates. Calcium was determined in almost all of the stones by the devise kit except for two that were seen from the standard. Six out of the 7 stones with uric acid components were detected by this study. Overall, the sensitivity of the device kit in determining for the presence of calcium, oxalate, phosphate and uric acid were 92%, 100%, 100% and 86%, respectively. Conclusion: The urinary stone analysis devise kit formulated is simple and cost effective and has high sensitivity in determining for the presence of calcium, oxalate, phosphate and uric acid components. Based on this study, this devise kit is recommended in the in-patient and out-patient services as well as in other diagnostic laboratories.

Urinary Stone