Bladder cancer immunomodulatory effects of intravesical Nitazoxanide, Rapamycin, Thalidomide and Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)

PURPOSE

To understand the effect of Nitazoxanide (NTZ), Rapamycin, Thalidomide, alone and in combination with BCG on bladder cancer (BC) histopathology and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) expression.

METHODS

Female Fisher-344 rats underwent intravesical N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU) followed by weekly intravesical treatment with saline (controls, n = 10), BCG (n = 10), NTZ (n = 8), BCG plus NTZ (n = 8), Rapamycin (n = 10) BCG plus Rapamycin (n = 10), Thalidomide (n = 10), and BCG plus Thalidomide (n = 10), and euthanized after 8 weeks and their bladders were investigated for BC and PD-L1 and CTLA4 expression.

RESULTS

Rapamicyn alone and in combination with BCG had the lowest number of bladder neoplasias in the histopathology exam (1/10). Neoplastic lesions were found in 4/10 BCG recipients, 5/10 Thalidomide recipients, 4/10 Thalidomide plus BCG recipients, 5/8 NTZ and 3/8 NTZ plus BCG recipients. Adding NTZ to BCG increased the expression of PD-L1 and adding Rapamycin or Thalidomide decreased PD-L1 and CTLA4 expression compared to BCG alone. Rapamycin alone significantly increased CTLA4 and slightly increased PD-L1 expression but its combination with BCG significantly decreased both markers. Thalidomide had a similar effect; however, it was only slightly different from the control and BCG alone groups.

CONCLUSION

Intravesical BCG combination treatment seems to effectively prevent BC development in an immunecompetent clinically relevant animal model, introducing Thalidomide, Nitazoxanide, and specially Rapamycin as candidates in the intravesical immunotherapy advancement. Our study contributes in understanding the mechanism of cancer immunotherapy.

Incontinence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a reverse systematic review

PURPOSE

To report the prevalence of the definitions used to identify post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and to compare the rates of PPI over time under different criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the period from January 1, 2000, until December 31, 2017, we used a recently described methodology to perform evidence acquisition called reverse systematic review (RSR). The continence definition and rates were evaluated and compared at 1, 3, 6, 12, and >18 months post-operative. Moreover, the RSR showed the "natural history" of PPI after LRP.

RESULTS

We identified 353 review articles in the systematized search, 137 studies about PPI were selected for data collection, and finally were included 203 reports (nr) with 51.436 patients. The most used criterion of continence was No pad (nr=121; 59.6%), the second one was Safety pad (nr=57; 28.1%). A statistically significant difference between continence criteria was identified only at >18 months (p=0.044). From 2013 until the end of our analysis, the Safety pad and Others became the most reported.

CONCLUSION

RSR revealed the "natural history" of PPI after the LRP technique, and showed that through time the Safety pad concept was mainly used. However, paradoxically, we demonstrated that the two most utilized criteria, Safety pad and No pad, had similar PPI outcomes. Further effort should be made to standardize the PPI denomination to evaluate, compare and discuss the urinary post-operatory function.

Differential Diagnosis of Azoospermia in Men with Infertility

The differential diagnosis between obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermia is the first step in the clinical management of azoospermic patients with infertility. It includes a detailed medical history and physical examination, semen analysis, hormonal assessment, genetic tests, and imaging studies. A testicular biopsy is reserved for the cases of doubt, mainly in patients whose history, physical examination, and endocrine analysis are inconclusive. The latter should be combined with sperm extraction for possible sperm cryopreservation. We present a detailed analysis on how to make the azoospermia differential diagnosis and discuss three clinical cases where the differential diagnosis was challenging. A coordinated effort involving reproductive urologists/andrologists, geneticists, pathologists, and embryologists will offer the best diagnostic path for men with azoospermia.