Detection, localisation and characterisation of prostate cancer by prostate HistoScanning(™).

UNLABELLED: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Prostate cancer is one of the few solid-organ cancers in which imaging is not used in the diagnostic process. Novel functional magnetic resonance imaging techniques offer promise but may not be cost-effective. Prostate HistoScanning(™) (PHS) is an ultrasound-based tissue characterisation technique that has previously shown encouraging results in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. The present study reports on the open 'unblinded' phase of a European multicentre study. The prospective 'blind' phase is currently in progress and will determine the value of PHS in a robust fashion overcoming many of the biases inherent in evaluating prostate imaging. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of prostate HistoScanning(™) (PHS) an ultrasound (US)-based tissue characterization application, to detect cancer foci by correlating results with detailed radical prostatectomy (RP) histology. PATIENT AND METHODS: In all, 31 patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, diagnosed on transrectal biopsies taken using US guidance, and scheduled for RP were recruited from six European centres. Before RP three-dimensional (3D) US raw data for PHS analysis was obtained. Histology by Bostwick Laboratories (London) examined sections obtained from whole mounted glands cut every 3-4 mm. Location and volume estimation of cancer foci by PHS were undertaken using two methods; a manual method and an embedded software tool. In this report we evaluate data obtained from a planned open study phase. The second phase of the study is 'blinded', and currently in progress. RESULTS: 31 patients were eligible for this phase. Three patients were excluded from analysis due to inadequate scan acquisition and pathology violations of the standard operating procedure. One patient withdrew from the study after 3D TRUS examination. PHS detected cancer ≥ 0.20 mL in 25/27 prostates (sensitivity 93%). In all, 23 patients had an index focus ≥ 0.5 mL at pathology, of which 21 were identified as ≥ 0.5 mL by PHS using the manual method (sensitivity 91%) and 19 were correctly identified as ≥ 0.5 mL by the embedded tool (sensitivity 83%). In 27 patients, histological analysis found 32 cancerous foci ≥ 0.2 mL, located in 97 of 162 sextants. After sextant analysis, PHS showed a 90% sensitivity and 72% specificity for the localisation of lesions ≥ 0.2 mL within a sextant. CONCLUSIONS: PHS has the ability to identify and locate prostate cancer and consequently may aid in pre-treatment and pre-surgical planning. In men with a lesion identified, it has potential to enable improved targeting, allowing better risk stratification by obtaining more representative cores. However further verification from the results of the blinded phase of this study are awaited.

Cizolirtine citrate is safe and effective for treating urinary incontinence secondary to overactive bladder: a phase 2 proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Antimuscarinic agents currently dominate medical treatment for urinary incontinence secondary to overactive bladder (OAB). Alternatives to improve their risk-benefit ratio are welcomed. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the efficacy and safety of oral cizolirtine citrate in this indication. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, phase 2 multicentre clinical trial performed by urologists or gynaecologists at referral centres. A sample was composed of 135 outpatients with signs of lower urinary tract dysfunction and urodynamically documented detrusor overactivity; 20 patients left the study prematurely, chiefly (n=10) because of adverse events. INTERVENTION: Allocation to treatments was asymmetrical (2:2:1) to cizolirtine citrate 800 mg/d, placebo, or oxybutynin 15 mg/d. Treatments were given for 12 wk. MEASUREMENTS: Efficacy measures included a bladder diary, filling- and voiding-phase urodynamic evaluations, and measure of quality of life (QoL). Adverse events were systematically recorded. Statistical procedures included analysis of covariance, chi(2) tests, and calculation of 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Most patients (92.6%) were female, and their mean age was 51.8 yr. Bladder diary variables improved significantly with active drug over placebo: The average number of voidings per 24 h was reduced by 33.4%, 17.0%, and 34.3% (p=0.001) in the cizolirtine citrate, placebo, and oxybutynin groups, respectively. The mean estimated voided volume per voluntary micturition increased by 17.8%, 0%, and 14.5% (p=0.002) in the cizolirtine citrate, placebo, and oxybutynin groups, respectively. The proportions of patients achieving fewer than eight voidings per 24 h, complete dryness, or both were also superior with active drugs over placebo. Only cizolirtine showed significant superiority over placebo to improve urodynamic parameters, although the asymmetrical allocation played against oxybutynin in the inferences. Cizolirtine citrate caused fewer antimuscarinic but more gastrointestinal (nausea) and neurologic (headache and vertigo) adverse events than oxybutynin. CONCLUSIONS: Cizolirtine citrate is a promising agent in the treatment of OAB with urinary incontinence.

Surface morphology of kidney, ureters and urinary bladder models based on data from the visible human male.

The aim of the present work was to create a simplified high-resolution three-dimensional model of kidneys, ureters and urinary bladder in a data form suitable for finite element/volume based numerical simulations. The exterior morphology of the organs was based on images from the Visible Human Male data set. In both the right and left kidney, there were defined their topographic relations to the neighbouring anatomical structures. This model of kidneys, ureters and urinary bladder will be incorporated into the model of The Visible Human Male abdomen and pelvis and it is ready to be used for numerical simulations in urinary system biomechanics.