MATERIALS AND METHODS: T24 cells treated with various concentrations of mitomycin (MC), 5-ALA and an MC/5-ALA mixture were evaluated to determine the role of 5-ALA on MC cytotoxicity. Cell cycle analysis was conducted, and apoptosis was analyzed by flow cytometry. Caspase 3 enzyme and reactive oxygen species were measured.
RESULTS: Our initial studies exploring the impact of combination therapy on cell viability demonstrated improved cytotoxic effects on T24 and RT cells with relatively low doses of 5-ALA/MC in conjunction with MC alone. Indicated no significant difference between the IC50 of MC and MC/5-ALA in T24 cells, while IC50 value was decreased by 25 % in RT4 cells in 5-ALA/MC in comparing with MC alone. However, examination of cell cycle phase arrests by flow cytometry revealed significant PreG1 apoptosis and cell growth arrest in G2/M in T24 cells treated with the MC/5-ALA mixture compared with MC treatment. In addition, caspase 3 enzyme was increased by 1.15-fold in T24 cells treated with MC/5-ALA in comparison with MC alone.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that 5-ALA might possess anti-cancer properties and is not only a photo diagnostic element.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the benefit of single-port robotic radical prostatectomy and the impact on outcome compared to multiple-port robotic radical prostatectomy.
METHODS: Based on PRISMA and AMSTAR criteria, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. Finally, we considered the controlled studies with two cohorts (one cohort for single-port RARP and the other cohort for multiple-port RARP). For statistical analysis, Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.4 was used. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS: Five non-randomized controlled studies with 666 patients were included. Single-port robotic radical prostatectomy was associated with shorter hospital stays. Only 60.6% of single-port patients (109/180) required analgesia compared to 90% (224/249) of multiple-port patients (Z = 3.50; p = 0.0005; 95% CI 0.07:0.47). Opioid administration was also significantly lower in single-port patients, 26.2% (34/130) vs. 56.6% (77/136) (Z = 4.90; p < 0.00001; 95% CI 0.15:-0.44) There was no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, complication rate, positive surgical margin rate, or continence at day 90.
CONCLUSION: The available data on single-port robotic radical prostatectomy is very limited. However, it seems comparable to the multiple-port platform in terms of short-term outcomes when performed with expert surgeons. Single-port prostatectomies might provide a shorter hospital stay and a lower requirement for opioids; however, randomized trials with long-term follow-up are mandatory for valid comparisons.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the role of checkpoint inhibitors as a neoadjuvant treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer before radical cystectomy.
METHODS: Based on the PRISMA statement, a systematic review of the literature was conducted through online databases and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Meeting Library. Suitable publications were subjected to full-text assessment. The primary outcome of this review was to identify the impact of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on the oncological outcomes and survival benefits.
RESULTS: From the retrieved 254 results, 8 studies including 404 patients were included. Complete response varied between 30% and 50%. Downstaging varied between 50% and 74%. ≥Grade 3 AEs were recorded in 8.6% of patients who received monotherapy with either Atezolizumab or Pembrolizumab. In patients who received combination treatment, the incidence of ≥Grade 3 AEs was 16.3% for chemoimmunotherapy and 36.5% for combined immunotherapy. A total of 373 patients (92%) underwent radical cystectomy. ≥Grade 3 Clavien-Dindo surgical complications were reported in 21.7% of the patients. One-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) varied between 81% and 92%, and 70% and 88%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The evidence on the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the setting of pre-radical cystectomy is quite limited, with noted variability within published trials. Combination with chemotherapy or another checkpoint inhibitor may boost response, although prospective studies with extended follow-up are needed to report on the survival advantages.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the oncological response of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients to immune checkpoint inhibitors.
METHODS: Based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, a systematic review of the literature was conducted through online electronic databases and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Meeting Library. Eligible publications were selected after a staged screening and selection process. RevMan 5.4 software was employed to run the quantitative analysis and forest plots. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Cochrane tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the randomized and non-randomized trials, respectively.
RESULTS: From the 831 results retrieved, 8 studies including 2768 patients were included. There was no significant effect on overall survival (OS) (overall response (OR) = 0.98; Z = 0.42; p = 0.67). Meanwhile, progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly better with immune checkpoint inhibitors administration (OR = 0.85; Z = 3.9; p < 0.0001). The subgroup analysis for oncological outcomes based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) positivity status displayed no significant effect, except on prostate-specific antigen response rate (PSA RR) (OR = 3.25; Z = 2.29; p = 0.02). Based on DNA damage repair (DDR), positive patients had a significantly better PFS and a trend towards better OS and overall response rate (ORR); the ORR was 40% in positive patients compared to 20% in the negative patients (OR = 2.46; Z = 1.3; p = 0.19), while PSA RR was 23.5% compared to 14.3% (OR = 1.88; Z = 0.88; p = 0.38). Better PFS was clearly associated with DDR positivity (OR = 0.70; Z = 2.48; p = 0.01) with a trend towards better OS in DDR positive patients (OR = 0.71; Z = 1.38; p = 0.17). Based on tumor mutation burden (TMB), ORR was 46.7% with high TMB versus 8.8% in patients with low TMB (OR = 11.88; Z = 3.0; p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: Checkpoint inhibitors provide modest oncological advantages in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. There are currently no good predictive indicators that indicate a greater response in some patients.