Kazunori Kihara M.D., Ph.D. Associate Editor

This issue, which covers a wide variety of meaningful topics, contains two Perspectives, one Review Article, seven Original Articles, two Short Communications, one Procedure and two Letters to the Editor.

The Perspective, by Oya (Tokyo, Japan), concerns the eradication of cancer cells in advanced renal cell carcinoma. It emphasizes that elucidating the molecular phenotype of the resistant cancer cells is important in determining the molecules to be targeted, and that molecules involved in the epithelial-mesenchymal transition are candidates for targeting. The Perspective by Tanaka (Fukuoka, Japan) gives us a serious warning on the wide dissemination of multidrug-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae strains of sequence types 1407 and 2958.

The effect of population-based screening on the incidence of prostate cancer, cancer stage and grade, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality remains controversial. The review by Lumen et al. (Ghent, Belgium) consists of an overview of available studies and a meta-analysis on population screening for prostate cancer, and they conclude that by excluding the main shortcomings in screening studies, screening is able to reduce prostate cancer mortality. Hinotsu (Kyoto, Japan) makes an Editorial Comment in response to this.

In the first of seven Original Articles, Maru et al. (Sapporo, Japan) investigated the influence of baseline renal function and dose reduction of chemotherapeutic agents on the outcome of metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients with renal impairment. The data show that “unfit (baseline 24-h creatinine clearance <60 mL/min/1.48 m2)” is a poor prognostic factor and that dose reduction contributed to continuous treatment in the unfit group, although its contribution to the prognosis is uncertain. Canter (Atlanta, USA) makes an Editorial Comment on this article. Urinary proteome analysis for prostate cancer diagnosis, carried out by Schiffer et al. (Hannover, Germany), shows that it is a cost-effective application for use in routine clinical practice. The interesting finding that combined histoarchitectural and cytological biopsy grading improves grading accuracy in low-grade prostate cancer is reported by Helpap et al. (Singen, Germany). Liu et al. (Hangzhou, China) show through a meta-analysis that cruciferous vegetables intake is related to a decreased risk of prostate cancer, and Hori (Cambridge, UK) makes an Editorial Comment on this. The relationship between alcohol consumption and female urinary incontinence is investigated by Lee et al. (Perth, Australia), who observed only a weak association in middle-aged and older Japanese women. Hsieh (Taipei, Taiwan) makes an Editorial Comment in response to this. Li et al. (Kobe, Japan) report, based on a meta-analysis, that surgical varicocele repair significantly increases testosterone production and improves testicular Leydig cell function. Yamamoto et al. (Osaka, Japan) report that water avoidance stress induces frequency through cyclooxygenase-2 expression in a rat bladder model.

In a Short Communication, the applicability of five published criteria for active surveillance for prostate cancer to Japanese patients was evaluated by Goto et al. (Yokohama, Japan), who concluded that they appear to be appropriate. An Editorial Comment on this is given by Suzuki (Tokyo, Japan). The additive effect of zoledronic acid on serum prostate-specific antigen changes was reported by Kamiya et al. (Chiba, Japan) in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients with bone metastasis treated by combined androgen blockade, which suggests a potential antitumor effect of zoledronic acid.

In the Procedure, Furubayashi et al. (Fukuoka, Japan) describe cutaneous ureterostomy using the transverse mesocolon. In one Letter to the Editor, Guo et al. (Beijing, China) present clinical characteristics of malignant solitary fibrous tumors of the kidney with thoracic vertebral metastasis. In the other, Ito et al. (Yokosuka, Japan) show a case of struma testis with seminoma arising from an undescended testis, on which an Editorial Comment by Chen (Suzhou, China) is given.

Conflict of interest

  1. Top of page
  2. Conflict of interest

None declared.