ABSTRACT Purpose: Propose an approach of prostate cancer (PCa) patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Material and Methods: We conducted a review of current literature related to surgical and clinical management of patients during COVID-19 crisis paying special attention to oncological ones and especially those suffering from PCa. Based on these publications and current urological guidelines, a manual to manage PCa patients is suggested. Results: Patients suffering from cancer are likely to develop serious complications from COVID-19 disease together with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the management of oncological patients should be taken into special consideration and most of the treatments postponed. In case the procedure is not deferrable, it should be adapted to the current situation. While the shortest radiotherapy (RT) regimens should be applied, surgical procedures must undergo the following recommendations proposed by main surgical associations. PCa prognosis is generally favourable and therefore one can safely delay most of the biopsies up to 6 months without interfering with survival outcomes in the vast majority of cases. In the same way, most of the localised PCa patients are suitable for active surveillance (AS) or hormonal therapy until local definitive treatment could be reconsidered. In metastatic as well as castration resistant PCa stages, adding androgen receptor targeted agents (abiraterone, apalutamide, darolutamide or enzalutamide) to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) could be considered in high risk patients. On the contrary, chemotherapy, immunotherapy and Radium-223 must be avoided with regard to the consequence of hematologic toxicity and risk of COVID-19 infection because of immunodepression. Conclusions: Most of the biopsies should be delayed while AS is advised in those patients with low risk PCa. ADT allows us to defer definitive local treatment in many cases of intermediate and high risk PCa. In regard to metastatic and castration resistant PCa, combination therapies with abiraterone, apalutamide, darolutamide or enzalutamide could be considered. Chemotherapy, Radium-223 and immunotherapy are discouraged.

Aim: Along the past decade a number of new agents have been developed showing promising results in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We describe our experience with the use of bevacizumab in monotherapy in the Urology and Medical Oncology departments of our institution. Material and methods: A consecutive series of patients treated with Bevacizumab 10 mg/Kg every 14 days between January 2006 and January 2008 has been assessed. Data concerning the type of surgery, histological subtype, tumor stage, Motzer’s risk group, metastatic sites number of bevacizumab courses given, time to progression and overall survival were collected. Results: 25 patients (16 male, 9 female) were analyzed. Median age was 59 years. Nineteen of them (75%) had prior surgery: radical nephrectomy 14, cytoreductive 4 y tumorectomy 1). Clear cell carcinoma was the most frequent subtype (22 patients). According to Motzer’s prognostic index 14 had good prognosis, 8 intermediate and 3 poor prognosis. Median time to progression was 19 weeks. Overall median survival since metastatic disease was diagnosed 8,7 months. Conclusions: Bevacizumab offers, as single agent, modest activity in the metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The recently labeled use in combination with interferon as well as the newer targeted agents will improve the results of the treatment of this disease in the next future.

Objetivos: En la última década se están desarrollando multitud de nuevas moléculas que ofrecen resultados esperanzadores para el tratamiento del CCR metastásico. Este estudio describe nuestra experiencia en 25 pacientes tratados con bevacizumab en monoterapia. Material y métodos: Se analizan los resultados obtenidos en 25 pacientes con CCR metastásico tratados con Bevacizumab (10 mg/Kg quincenal) entre enero del 2006 y enero del 2008. Se recogieron datos acerca del tipo de cirugía practicada, tipo histológico, estadio tumoral, grupo de riesgo de Motzer, localizaciones metastásicas, número de ciclos administrados, tiempo hasta la progresión y supervivencia global. Resultados: Se analizaron 25 pacientes (16 varones y 9 mujeres), con una mediana de edad de 59 años. Más de la mitad de ellos (19) se había sometido a algún tipo de intervención quirúrgica (14 nefrectomía radical, 4 citorreductora y 1 tumorectomía). La mayor parte de los enfermos presentaban histología de células claras (22). 14 pacientes pertenecían al grupo de buen pronóstico de Motzer, 8 al grupo de pronóstico intermedio y 3 al de mal pronóstico. La mediana de tiempo hasta la progresión fue de 19 semanas, con una mediana de supervivencia global desde el inicio de tratamiento de 8,7 meses. Conclusiones: El bevacizumab en monoterapia ofrece unos resultados modestos para el tratamiento del CCR metastásico. Su reciente aprobación en combinación con Interferon, y la aparición progresiva de distintas dianas terapéuticas, permitirá optimizar los resultados en los próximos años.

Objetive: This paper presents a review of the concept of "nomogram" applied to prostate cancer, and specifically as a staging tool. Methods/Results: We describe the essential parameters for the evaluation of such type of predictive models: Calibration, discrimination and clinical usefulness. Such requisites are analyzed using a real clinical case in our clinical setting, comparing the "Partin`s tables" and the "Miguel Servet University Hospital´s nomogram". We demonstrate its correct calibration, discrimination and clinical usefulness after previous selection of proper cut points. Conclusion: The application of the predictive model to our clinical practice has achieved a clinical understaging of 17.3% after radical prostatectomy.

Objetivo: En este trabajo se presenta una revisión del concepto de "nomograma" aplicado al cáncer de próstata y específicamente como medio de estadificación. Métodos/Resultados: Para ello se describen los parámetros indispensables para evaluar este tipo de modelos predictivos, a saber: Calibración, Discriminación y Utilidad Clínica. Estos requisitos son analizados sobre un caso práctico real en nuestro medio asistencial comparando las "Tablas de Partin" y el "Nomograma del Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet", demostrando su correcta calibración, discriminación y utilidad clínica previa selección de adecuados puntos de corte. Conclusión: La aplicación del modelo predictivo a nuestra práctica asistencial ha logrado una infraestadificación clínica tras prostatectomía radical del 17,3%.

Objectives: To evaluate if radical prostatectomy may positively influence cancer-specific survival (CSS), hormone-resistance-free time, metastasis-free time, and quality of life(QoL) of patients with prostate adenocarcinoma and seminal vesicle invasion, and also to update our thoughts about seminal vesicle biopsy. Methods: 114 patients were included. Forty-six cases were diagnosed of seminal vesicle invasion after radical prostatectomy; 68 cases were diagnosed of seminal vesicle invasion after biopsy, not undergoing then surgery. Cancer specific survival, time to hormone resistance from the start of hormonal treatment, metástasis free time and QoL, measured as need for hospital care, were compared between groups. Median follow-up time was 52.6 mos. Results: There were not statistically significant differences between groups in CSS, time to hormone resistance, metástasis free time and QoL. Three and five-year cancer specific survival were 100% and 80.77% for the radical prostatectomy group and 74.4% and 56.2% for the biopsy group. Primary grade and Gleason Score were independent predictors for CSS in the Cox regression test; clinical stage was independent predictor for time to hormone resistance. Conclusions: Radical prostatectomy as monotherapy does not show a statistically significant influence on follow-up time, CSS, time to hormone resistance, metástasis free time or QoL in patients with prostate cancer and seminal vesicle invasion associated with other bad prognostic factors (unfavourable Gleason and PSA). The value of seminal vesicle biopsy remains for the study of new multimodal treatments, such as chemotherapy + surgery, and it is to be defined in the planning of radio and cryosurgery.

Objetivo: Comprobar si la prostatectomía radical puede influir favorablemente en la supervivencia cáncer-especifica (SCE), tiempo libre de hormonorresistencia y tiempo libre de metástasis (TLM) y calidad de vida (CV), en pacientes con adenocarcinoma de próstata e invasión de vesículas seminales, asi como, realizar una actualización de nuestro pensamiento sobre la biopsia de vesículas seminales. Métodos: Se incluyeron 114 pacientes En 46 se diagnostico invasión de vesículas seminales tras la realización de prostatectomía radical (PRVS) de intención curativa y en 68 casos, la invasión fue diagnosticada mediante la biopsia de las mismas (BxVS) no practicándose la prostatectomía radical. Se compararon la SCE, tiempo hasta la hormonorresistencia desde el inicio del tratamiento hormonal (THR), TLM y CV medida en necesidades de atención hospitalaria en ambos grupos. La mediana del tiempo de seguimiento fue de 52,6 meses. Resultados: No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre ambos grupos en SCE, THR, TLM y CV. La SCE a 3 y 5 anos fue del 100% y 80.77% para el grupo PRVS y del 92.03% y 77,46% para el grupo BxVS. El THR a 3 y 5 anos fue del 90.6% y 58.7% para el grupo PRVS y del 74,4% y 56,2% para el grupo BxVS. En la regresión de Cox se mostraron predictores independientes de SCE el grado primario y suma de Gleason y de THR el estadio clínico. Conclusiones: La prostatectomía radical como monoterapia no influye de forma estadísticamente significativa en el tiempo de seguimiento realizado, en la SCE, THR, TLM y CV de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata e invasión de vesículas seminales asociada a otros factores de mal pronostico (Gleason y PSA desfavorables). El valor de la biopsia de vesículas seminales permanece en el estudio de nuevos tratamientos multimodales, como pueden ser la quimioterapia en combinacion con la cirugía, y esta pendiente de definir en la planificación de la radioterapia y la criocirugía.