[Approach to prostate cancer in men older than 75 years: active or passive?]

Based on the exponential aging of the population and the increasing life expectancy in industrialized western countries, prostate cancer (PCa) in elderly men is becoming a disease of increasing significance. Consensus exists that men over the age of 75 years should not be screened for PCa; however, higher age as a single parameter should not exclude men from being diagnosed with prostate cancer and treated accordingly. It is well-known that overdiagnosis and overtreatment are frequent in this age group. Competing mortality risks of men older than 75 years may supersede the risk of dying from PCa several fold. Both the treating physician and the patient himself should therefore balance the possible risks and benefits of diagnosing and treating prostate cancer concerning the impact on quality of life. This is of special importance when taking into account that the complication rates of curative treatment modalities are higher in older patients than in younger men and that hormonal treatment might have negative effects especially in older men.Age, existing comorbidities, cognitive and physical status in combination with specific tumor parameters are useful tools for an individualized treatment.Therapy should be considered for healthy, active men aged 75 years or older who present with high-risk PCa and/or with a PSA doubling time <12 months. Elderly men who are unfit or have low to intermediate risk PCa will most likely not benefit from treatment.

Assessment of estrogenic exposure in brown trout (Salmo trutta) in a Swiss midland river: integrated analysis of passive samplers, wild and caged fish, and vitellogenin mRNA and protein

This field study examined the vitellogenin (VTG) biomarker response under conditions of low and fluctuating activities of environmental estrogenicity. The present study was performed on immature brown trout (Salmo trutta) exposed to the small river Luetzelmurg, which is located in the prealpine Swiss midland region and receives effluents from a single sewage treatment plant (STP). To understand better factors influencing the relationship between estrogenic exposure and VTG induction, we compared VTG levels in caged (stationary) and feral (free-ranging) fish, VTG levels in fish from up- and downstream of the STP, and two different methods for quantifying VTG (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay vs real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction), and we used passive samplers (polar organic chemical integrative sampler [POCIS]) to integrate the variable, bioaccumulative estrogenic load in the river water over time. The POCIS from the downstream site contained approximately 20-fold higher levels of bioassay-derived estrogen equivalents than the POCIS from the upstream site. In feral fish, this site difference in estrogenic exposure was reflected in VTG protein levels but not in VTG mRNA. In contrast, in caged fish, the site difference was evident only for VTG mRNA but not for VTG protein. Thus, the outcome of VTG biomarker measurements varied with the analytical detection method (protein vs mRNA) and with the exposure modus (caged vs feral). Our findings suggest that for environmental situations with low and variable estrogenic contamination, a multiple-assessment approach may be necessary for the assessment of estrogenic exposure in fish.

Effect of transcutaneous electrical muscle stimulation and passive cycling movements on blood pressure and removal of urea and phosphate during hemodialysis

BACKGROUND: Intradialytic exercise has been described to improve blood pressure stability and dialysis efficacy. However, comorbid conditions in the dialysis population often preclude the widespread use of active intradialytic exercise. Therefore, we investigated the effect of intradialytic transcutaneous muscle stimulation (TEMS) and passive cycling movements (PCMs) on blood pressure and dialysis efficacy in patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled, randomized, crossover investigation. SETTING ; PARTICIPANTS: Ten patients were randomly allocated to TEMS, PCMs, or no intervention (NI) for 9 consecutive dialysis sessions. INTERVENTION: Participants were studied with NI, PCMs using a motor-driven ergometer, and bilateral TEMS of the leg musculature. Individual dialysis prescriptions were unchanged during the investigation. OUTCOMES ; MEASUREMENTS: The effect of TEMS and PCMs on blood pressure and dialysis efficacy in patients was assessed. RESULTS: Mean blood pressure increased from 121/64 +/- 21/15 mm Hg with NI to 132/69 +/- 21/15 mm Hg (P < 0.001) during sessions with PCMs and 125/66 +/- 22/16 mm Hg (P < 0.05) during sessions with TEMS. Urea and phosphate removal during dialysis were significantly (P < 0.001) greater with TEMS (19.4 +/- 3.7 g/dialysis and 1,197 +/- 265 mg/dialysis) or PCMs (20.1 +/- 3.4 g/dialysis and 1,172 +/- 315 mg/dialysis) than with NI (15.1 +/- 3.9 g/dialysis and 895 +/- 202 mg/dialysis). Body weight, ultrafiltration, Kt/V, and increases in hemoglobin and albumin levels during dialysis did not differ among the NI, PCMs, and TEMS groups. LIMITATIONS: The study design does not allow extension of the findings to prolonged treatment. CONCLUSION: Future studies during longer observation periods will have to prove the persistence of these acute findings. Both TEMS and PCMs deserve future investigations in dialysis patients because they increase intradialytic blood pressure and facilitate urea and phosphate removal when applied short term.