Urs E Studer

Publications (5)38.34 Total impact

• Article: Lymph node dissection in renal cell carcinoma.

  Umberto Capitanio, Frank Becker, Michael L Blute, Peter Mulders, Jean-Jacques Patard, Paul Russo, Urs E Studer, Hein Van Poppel
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Although lymphadenectomy (lymph node dissection [LND]) is currently accepted as the most accurate and reliable staging procedure for the detection of lymph node invasion (LNI), its therapeutic benefit in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) still remains controversial. Review the available literature concerning the role of LND in RCC staging and outcome. A Medline search was conducted to identify original articles, review articles, and editorials addressing the role of LND in RCC. Keywords included kidney neoplasms, renal cell cancer, renal cell carcinoma, kidney cancer, lymphadenectomy, lymph node excision, lymphatic metastases, nephrectomy, imaging, and complications. The articles with the highest level of evidence were identified with the consensus of all of the collaborative authors and were critically reviewed. This review is the result of an interactive peer-reviewing process by an expert panel of co-authors. Renal lymphatic drainage is unpredictable. The newer available imaging techniques are still immature in detecting small lymph node metastases. Results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 30881 showed no benefit in performing LND during surgery for clinically node-negative RCC, but the results are limited to patients with the lowest risk of developing LNI. Numerous retrospective series support the hypothesis that LND may be beneficial in high-risk patients (clinical T3-T4, high Fuhrman grade, presence of sarcomatoid features, or coagulative tumor necrosis). If enlarged nodes are evident at imaging or palpable during surgery, LND seems justified at any stage. However, the extent of the LND remains a matter of controversy. To date, the available evidence suggests that an extended LND may be beneficial when technically feasible in patients with locally advanced disease (T3-T4) and/or unfavorable clinical and pathologic characteristics (high Fuhrman grade, larger tumors, presence of sarcomatoid features, and/or coagulative tumor necrosis). Although node-positive patients often harbor distant metastases as well, the majority of retrospective nonrandomized trials seem to suggest a possible benefit of regional LND even for this group of patients. In patients with T1-T2, clinically negative lymph nodes and absence of unfavorable clinical and pathologic characteristics, regional LND offers limited staging information and no benefit in terms of decreasing disease recurrence or improving survival.
  European urology 09/2011; 60(6):1212-20. · 7.67 Impact Factor
• Article: Contemporary role of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.

  Vincenzo Pagliarulo, Sergio Bracarda, Mario A Eisenberger, Nicolas Mottet, Fritz H Schröder, Cora N Sternberg, Urs E Studer
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) represents one of the most effective systemic palliative treatments known for solid tumors. Although clinical trials have assessed the role of ADT in patients with metastatic and advanced locoregional disease, the risk-benefit ratio, especially in earlier stages, remains poorly defined. Given the mounting evidence for potentially life-threatening adverse effects with short- and long-term ADT, it is important to redefine the role of ADT for this disease. Review the published experience with currently available ADT approaches in various contemporary clinical settings of PCa and reported serious treatment-related adverse events. This review addresses the level of evidence associated with the use of ADT in PCa, focusing upon survival outcome measures. Furthermore, this paper discusses evolving approaches targeting androgen receptor signaling pathways and emerging evidence from clinical trials with newer compounds. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed, focusing on data from the last 10 yr (January 2000 to July 2011) and using the terms androgen deprivation, hormone treatment, prostate cancer and adverse effects. Abstracts from trials reported at international conferences held in 2010 and 2011 were also evaluated. Data from randomized controlled trials and population-based studies were analyzed in different clinical paradigms. Specifically, the role of ADT was evaluated in patients with nonmetastatic disease as the primary and sole treatment, in combination with radiation therapy (RT) or after surgery, and in patients with metastatic disease. The data suggest that in men with nonmetastatic disease, the use of primary ADT as monotherapy has not shown a benefit and is not recommended, while ADT combined with conventional-dose RT (<72Gy) for patients with high-risk disease may delay progression and prolong survival. The postoperative use of ADT remains poorly evaluated in prospective studies. Likewise, there are no trials evaluating the role of ADT in patients with biochemical relapses after surgery or RT. In patients with metastatic disease, there is a clear benefit in terms of quality of life, reduction of disease-associated morbidity, and possibly survival. Treatment with bilateral orchiectomy, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist therapy, with and without antiandrogens has been associated with various serious adverse events, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and skeletal complications that may also affect mortality. Although ADT is an effective treatment of PCa, consistent long-term benefits in terms of quality and quantity of life are predominantly evident in patients with advanced/metastatic disease or when ADT is used in combination with RT (<72Gy) in patients with high-risk tumors. Implementation of ADT should be evidence based, with special consideration to adverse events and the risk-benefit ratio.
  European urology 08/2011; 61(1):11-25. · 7.67 Impact Factor
• Source

  Available from: eu-acme.org

  Article: Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer.

  Alberto Briganti, Michael L Blute, James H Eastham, Markus Graefen, Axel Heidenreich, Jeffrey R Karnes, Francesco Montorsi, Urs E Studer
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is considered the most reliable procedure for the detection of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer (PCa); however, the therapeutic benefit of PLND in PCa management is currently under debate. To systematically review the available literature concerning the role of PLND and its extent in PCa staging and outcome. All of the existing recommendations and staging tools determining the need for PLND were also assessed. Moreover, a systematic review was performed of the long-term outcome of node-positive patients stratified according to the extent of nodal invasion. A Medline search was conducted to identify original and review articles as well as editorials addressing the significance of PLND in PCa. Keywords included prostate cancer, pelvic lymph node dissection, radical prostatectomy, imaging, and complications. Data from the selected studies focussing on the role of PLND in PCa staging and outcome were reviewed and discussed by all of the contributing authors. Despite recent advances in imaging techniques, PLND remains the most accurate staging procedure for the detection of lymph node invasion (LNI) in PCa. The rate of LNI increases with the extent of PLND. Extended PLND (ePLND; ie, removal of obturator, external iliac, hypogastric with or without presacral and common iliac nodes) significantly improves the detection of lymph node metastases compared with limited PLND (lPLND; ie, removal of obturator with or without external iliac nodes), which is associated with poor staging accuracy. Because not all patients with PCa are at the same risk of harbouring nodal metastases, several nomograms and tables have been developed and validated to identify candidates for PLND. These tools, however, are based mostly on findings derived from lPLND dissections performed in older patient series. According to these prediction models, a staging PLND might be omitted in low-risk PCa patients because of the low rate of lymph node metastases found, even after extended dissections (<8%). The outcome for patients with positive nodes is not necessarily poor. Indeed, patients with low-volume nodal metastases experience excellent survival rates, regardless of adjuvant treatment. But despite few retrospective studies reporting an association between PLND and PCa progression and survival, the exact impact of PLND on patient outcomes has not yet been clearly proven because of the lack of prospective randomised trials. On the basis of current data, we suggest that if a PLND is indicated, then it should be extended. Conversely, in view of the low rate of LNI among patients with low-risk PCa, a staging ePLND might be spared in this patient category. Whether this approach is also safe from oncologic perspectives is still unknown. Patients with low-volume nodal metastases have a good long-term prognosis; to what extent this prognosis is the result of a positive impact of PLND on PCa outcomes is still to be determined.
  European urology 03/2009; 55(6):1251-65. · 7.67 Impact Factor
• Source

  Available from: urosource.com

  Article: The impact of lymphadenectomy and lymph node metastasis on the outcomes of radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.

  Alexander Karl, Peter R Carroll, Jürgen E Gschwend, Ruth Knüchel, Francesco Montorsi, Christian G Stief, Urs E Studer
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: The presence of lymph node metastases and the extent of lymphadenectomy have both been shown to influence the outcome of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Current standards for detection of lymph node metastases, lymph-node mapping studies, histopathologic techniques, and risk factors in relation to lymph node involvement are discussed. The impact of lymph node metastases and the extent of lymphadenectomy on the outcome of patients treated with radical cystectomy are analyzed. A systematic literature review of bladder cancer and lymph nodes was performed searching the electronic databases Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane, and Embase. Articles were selected based on title, abstract, study format, and content by a consensus of all participating authors. Lymph node status is highly consequential in bladder cancer patients because the presence of lymph node metastases is predictive of poor outcome. Knowledge of primary landing sites of lymph node metastases is important for optimum therapeutic management. Accurate pathologic work-ups of resected lymph node tissue are mandatory. Molecular markers could potentially guide therapeutic decisions in the future because they may enable the detection of micrometastatic disease. In current series, radical cystectomy with an extended lymphadenectomy seems to provide a clinically meaningful therapeutic benefit compared with a limited approach. However, the anatomic boundaries of lymph node dissection are still under debate. Therefore, large prospective multicenter trials are needed to validate the influence of extended lymph node dissection on disease-specific survival. An extended pelvic lymph node dissection (encompassing the external iliac vessels, the obturator fossa, the lateral and medial aspects of the internal iliac vessels, and at least the distal half of the common iliac vessels together with its bifurcation) can be curative in patients with metastasis or micrometastasis to a few nodes. Therefore, the procedure may be offered to all patients undergoing radical cystectomy for invasive bladder cancer.
  European urology 02/2009; 55(4):826-35. · 7.67 Impact Factor
• Article: Androgen deprivation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer: consider both benefits and risks.

  Hendrik Isbarn, Laurent Boccon-Gibod, Peter R Carroll, Francesco Montorsi, Claude Schulman, Matthew R Smith, Cora N Sternberg, Urs E Studer
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is increasingly used for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa), even in clinical settings in which there is no evidence-based proof of prolonged overall survival (OS). ADT, however, may be associated with numerous side effects, including an increased therapy-related cardiovascular mortality. To discuss different clinical settings in which ADT is currently used and to critically weigh the benefits of ADT against its possible side effects. A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify original articles and review articles addressing the efficacy and side effects of ADT for the treatment of PCa. Keywords consisted of prostate cancer, hormonal therapy, adverse effects, radical prostatectomy, and radiotherapy. The articles with the highest level of evidence for the various examined end points were identified with the consensus of all authors and were reviewed. Even short-term use of ADT may lead to numerous side effects, such as osteoporosis, obesity, sarcopenia, lipid alterations, insulin resistance, and increased risk for diabetes and cardiovascular morbidity. Despite these side effects, ADT is commonly used in various clinical settings in which a clear effect on improved OS has not been shown. ADT is associated with an increased risk of multiple side effects that may reduce quality of life and/or OS. Consequently, these issues should be discussed in detail with patients and their families before initiation of ADT. ADT should be used with knowledge of its potential long-term side effects and with possible lifestyle interventions, especially in settings with the highest risk-benefit ratio, to alleviate comorbidities.
  European urology 11/2008; 55(1):62-75. · 7.67 Impact Factor