METHODS: The Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine (APSSM) panel of experts reviewed contemporary evidence regarding penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery with an emphasis on key issues relevant to the Asia-Pacific (AP) region and developed a consensus statement and set of clinical practice recommendations on behalf of the APSSM. The Medline and EMBASE databases were searched using the following terms: "penile prosthesis implant," "Peyronie's disease," "penile lengthening," "penile augmentation," "penile enlargement," "buried penis," "penile disorders," "penile trauma," "transgender," and "penile reconstruction" between January 2001 and June 2022. A modified Delphi method was undertaken, and the panel evaluated, agreed, and provided consensus statements on clinically relevant penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery, namely (1) penile prosthesis implantation, (2) Peyronie's disease, (3) penile trauma, (4) gender-affirming (phalloplasty) surgery, and (5) penile esthetic (length and/or girth enlargement) surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were specific statements and clinical recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, and if clinical evidence is lacking, a consensus agreement is adopted. The panel provided statements on clinical aspects of surgical management in penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery.

RESULTS: There is a variation in surgical algorithms in patients based on sociocultural characteristics and the availability of local resources. Performing preoperative counseling and obtaining adequate informed consent are paramount and should be conducted to discuss various treatment options, including the pros and cons of each surgical intervention. Patients should be provided with information regarding potential complications related to surgery, and strict adherence to safe surgical principles, preoperative optimization of medical comorbidities and stringent postoperative care are important to improve patient satisfaction rates. For complex patients, surgical intervention should ideally be referred and performed by expert high-volume surgeons to maximize clinical outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Due to the uneven distribution of surgical access and expertise across the AP region, development of relevant comprehensive surgical protocols and regular training programs is desirable.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This consensus statement covers comprehensive penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery topics and is endorsed by the APSSM. The variations in surgical algorithms and lack of sufficient high-level evidence in these areas could be stated as a limitation.

METHODS: Six key sections were chosen: (1) high-risk localized and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) oligometastatic prostate cancer, (3) castration-naïve prostate cancer, (4) castrate resistant prostate cancer, (5) use of osteoclast-targeted therapy and (6) global access to prostate cancer drugs. There were 101 consensus questions, consisting of 91 questions from APCCC 2017 and 10 new questions from MyAPCCC 2018, selected and modified by the steering committee; of which, 23 questions were assessed in both ideal world and real-world settings. A panel of 22 experts, comprising of 11 urologists and 11 oncologists, voted on 101 predefined questions anonymously. Final voting results were compared with the APCCC 2017 outcomes.

RESULTS: Most voting results from the MyAPCCC 2018 were consistent with the APCCC 2017 outcomes. No consensus was achieved for controversial topics with little level I evidence, such as management of oligometastatic disease. No consensus was reached on using high-cost drugs in castration-naïve or castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer in real-world settings. All panellists recommended using generic drugs when available.

METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials including IPD. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, Embase, Science Citation Index, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effects for literature from 1992 onwards (date of search, Aug 27, 2018). The following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) men aged 18 years and older with a screening testosterone concentration of 12 nmol/L (350 ng/dL) or less; (2) the intervention of interest was treatment with any testosterone formulation, dose frequency, and route of administration, for a minimum duration of 3 months; (3) a comparator of placebo treatment; and (4) studies assessing the pre-specified primary or secondary outcomes of interest. Details of study design, interventions, participants, and outcome measures were extracted from published articles and anonymised IPD was requested from investigators of all identified trials. Primary outcomes were mortality, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular events at any time during follow-up. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We did a one-stage meta-analysis using IPD, and a two-stage meta-analysis integrating IPD with data from studies not providing IPD. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018111005.

FINDINGS: 9871 citations were identified through database searches and after exclusion of duplicates and of irrelevant citations, 225 study reports were retrieved for full-text screening. 116 studies were subsequently excluded for not meeting the inclusion criteria in terms of study design and characteristics of intervention, and 35 primary studies (5601 participants, mean age 65 years, [SD 11]) reported in 109 peer-reviewed publications were deemed suitable for inclusion. Of these, 17 studies (49%) provided IPD (3431 participants, mean duration 9·5 months) from nine different countries while 18 did not provide IPD data. Risk of bias was judged to be low in most IPD studies (71%). Fewer deaths occurred with testosterone treatment (six [0·4%] of 1621) than placebo (12 [0·8%] of 1537) without significant differences between groups (odds ratio [OR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·17-1·24]; p=0·13). Cardiovascular risk was similar during testosterone treatment (120 [7·5%] of 1601 events) and placebo treatment (110 [7·2%] of 1519 events; OR 1·07 [95% CI 0·81-1·42]; p=0·62). Frequently occurring cardiovascular events included arrhythmia (52 of 166 vs 47 of 176), coronary heart disease (33 of 166 vs 33 of 176), heart failure (22 of 166 vs 28 of 176), and myocardial infarction (10 of 166 vs 16 of 176). Overall, patient age (interaction 0·97 [99% CI 0·92-1·03]; p=0·17), baseline testosterone (interaction 0·97 [0·82-1·15]; p=0·69), smoking status (interaction 1·68 [0·41-6·88]; p=0.35), or diabetes status (interaction 2·08 [0·89-4·82; p=0·025) were not associated with cardiovascular risk.

INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence that testosterone increased short-term to medium-term cardiovascular risks in men with hypogonadism, but there is a paucity of data evaluating its long-term safety. Long-term data are needed to fully evaluate the safety of testosterone.

METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate characteristics associated with symptomatic benefit of testosterone treatment versus placebo in men aged 18 years and older with a baseline serum total testosterone concentration of less than 12 nmol/L. We searched major electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinical trial registries for reports published in English between Jan 1, 1992, and Aug 27, 2018. Anonymised individual participant data were requested from the investigators of all identified trials. Primary (cardiovascular) outcomes from this analysis have been published previously. In this report, we present the secondary outcomes of sexual function, quality of life, and psychological outcomes at 12 months. We did a one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis with a random-effects linear regression model, and a two-stage meta-analysis integrating individual participant data with aggregated data from studies that did not provide individual participant data. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018111005.

FINDINGS: 9871 citations were identified through database searches. After exclusion of duplicates and publications not meeting inclusion criteria, 225 full texts were assessed for inclusion, of which 109 publications reporting 35 primary studies (with a total 5601 participants) were included. Of these, 17 trials provided individual participant data (3431 participants; median age 67 years [IQR 60-72]; 3281 [97%] of 3380 aged ≥40 years) Compared with placebo, testosterone treatment increased 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-15) total score (mean difference 5·52 [95% CI 3·95-7·10]; τ2=1·17; n=1412) and IIEF-15 erectile function subscore (2·14 [1·40-2·89]; τ2=0·64; n=1436), reaching the minimal clinically important difference for mild erectile dysfunction. These effects were not found to be dependent on participant age, obesity, presence of diabetes, or baseline serum total testosterone. However, absolute IIEF-15 scores reached during testosterone treatment were subject to thresholds in patient age and baseline serum total testosterone. Testosterone significantly improved Aging Males' Symptoms score, and some 12-item or 36-item Short Form Survey quality of life subscores compared with placebo, but it did not significantly improve psychological symptoms (measured by Beck Depression Inventory).

INTERPRETATION: In men aged 40 years or older with baseline serum testosterone of less than 12 nmol/L, short-to-medium-term testosterone treatment could provide clinically meaningful treatment for mild erectile dysfunction, irrespective of patient age, obesity, or degree of low testosterone. However, due to more severe baseline symptoms, the absolute level of sexual function reached during testosterone treatment might be lower in older men and men with obesity.