A randomized placebo-controlled multicentre study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of finasteride for male chronic pelvic pain syndrome (category IIIA chronic nonbacterial prostatitis)

Chronic Primary Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Men

BACKGROUND

Chronic primary pelvic pain syndrome in men (CPPPSm) can be associated with urogenital pain, urinary symptoms, sexual dysfunction, and emotional disturbance. Its clinical heterogeneity and incompletely understood pathogenesis make it more difficult to treat. This article is intended to familiarize the reader with basic aspects of the manifestations, pathophysiology, diagnostic evaluation, differential diagnosis, and treatment of this condition.

METHODS

This article is based on relevant publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature, including the current guidelines of the European Association of Urology. The features of this disease pertaining to urology, psychosomatic medicine, and pain medicine are illuminated from an interdisciplinary perspective.

RESULTS

Chronic pelvic pain appears to arise through a complex interaction of inflammatory, infectious, neurological, musculoskeletal, and psychosomatic factors. A comprehensive diagnostic work-up should be carried out to evaluate and exclude the numerous differential diagnoses. Treatment strategies are based on the clinical phenotype. Randomized controlled trials have shown that significant relief can be achieved with a variety of drugs and non-pharmacological treatments, selected according to the manifestations of the condition in the individual case. Attention must be paid to treatment-specific adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The management of patients with CPPPSm should consist of a comprehensive differential diagnostic evaluation and an individually oriented treatment strategy.

Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome Induces Depression-Like Behavior and Learning-Memory Impairment: A Possible Link with Decreased Hippocampal Neurogenesis and Astrocyte Activation

Pathogenesis of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) remains unclear since it represents an interplay between immunological, endocrine, and neuropsychiatric factors. Patients suffering from CP/CPPS often develop mental health-related disorders such as anxiety, depression, or cognitive impairment. The aim of this study was to investigate depression-like behavior, learning, and memory processes in a rat model of CP/CPPS and to determine the alterations in hippocampal structure and function. Adult male Wistar albino rats (n = 6 in each group) from CP/CPPS (single intraprostatic injection of 3% λ-carrageenan, day 0) and Sham (0.9% NaCl) groups were subjected to pain threshold test (days 2, 3, and 7), depression-like behavior, and learning-memory tests (both on day 7). Decreased pain threshold in the scrotal region and histopathological presence of necrosis and inflammatory infiltrate in prostatic tissue confirmed the development of CP/CPPS. The forced swimming test revealed the depression-like behavior evident through increased floating time, while the modified elevated plus maze test revealed learning and memory impairment through prolonged transfer latency in the CP/CPPS group in comparison with Sham (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Biochemical analysis showed decreased serum levels of testosterone in CP/CPPS group vs. the Sham (p < 0.001). The CP/CPPS induced a significant upregulation of ICAM-1 in rat cortex (p < 0.05) and thalamus (p < 0.01) and increased GFAP expression in the hippocampal astrocytes (p < 0.01) vs. Sham, suggesting subsequent neuroinflammation and astrocytosis. Moreover, a significantly decreased number of DCX+ and Ki67+ neurons in the hippocampus was observed in the CP/CPPS group (p < 0.05) vs. Sham, indicating decreased neurogenesis and neuronal proliferation. Taken together, our data indicates that CP/CPPS induces depression-like behavior and cognitive declines that are at least partly mediated by neuroinflammation and decreased neurogenesis accompanied by astrocyte activation.

Short course of dutasteride in treatment of a refractory category IIIB chronic prostatitis (A placebo-controlled study)

Objective

To evaluate the short-term efficacy of Dutasteride in the management of chronic prostatitis (CP)/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

Materials and methods

A randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study was conducted that including 50 patients diagnosed with CP based on the presence of pelvic pain for ≥3 months of the preceding 6 months. Patients were randomized into 2 equal groups to evaluate Dutasteride of 0.5 mg once daily that was given for 3 months compared to a placebo.

Results

Forty-nine patients were evaluated after the follow-up period with no statistically significant difference in the perioperative demographic data. The mean age of the Dutasteride group was 48.3 (range 41-62) compared to a mean age of 46.5 (range 44-60) in the placebo group. There was a highly statistically significant improvement in the Dutasteride group compared to its preoperative parameters and the placebo compared group in the terms of pain, urinary scores, and total National Institutes of Health CP symptom score. Moderate and marked improvement in patients' symptomatology was seen in 56% of the dutasteride group, while only 8% in the dutasteride group failed to show an improvement with no significant side effects noted in our study.

Conclusion

The short-term outcome of dutasteride therapy showed an improvement in the National Institutes of Health-CP symptom score compared to a placebo in the treatment of category IIIB CP.

The trial was registered in the clinical trialgov registry with a registration number

NCT04756206.

Oral pharmacological treatments for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological treatments for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) are empirically used. However, the quantitative comparative effectiveness and safety of multiple pharmacological treatments is lacking.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 22, 2022. Randomised controlled trials comparing two or more oral pharmacological treatments for patients with CP/CPPS were included. Title, abstract, and full-text screening were independently screened by four reviewers. Primary outcomes were efficacy (the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index [NIH-CPSI] total score, pain score, urinary score, and quality of life score [QoL]) and safety (adverse events). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020184106.

FINDINGS

25 studies (3514 patients) assessed 26 treatments. Low to very low quality evidence indicated that doxazosin (Mean difference [MD], -11.4, 95% Credible interval [CrI], -17.5 to -5.1) and the doxazosin, ibuprofen, and thiocolchicoside combination (MD, -11.6, CrI, -18.1 to -5.3) were significantly more effective than placebo in the NIH-CPSI total score. Other NIH-CPSI relative outcomes (pain, urinary, and QoL scores) showed a similar pattern. Low and very low quality evidence suggested that combination treatment including doxazosin, ibuprofen, and thiocolchicoside (odds ratios [OR], 3.2, CrI, 0.5 to 19.3) and the tamsulosin and dapoxetine combination (OR, 6.0, CrI, 0.7 to 67.3) caused more adverse events. In half of all comparisons regarding NIH-CPSI pain scores and quality of life scores, heterogeneity was minimal or low. Heterogeneity was high in both NIH-CPSI total symptom scores (I²  = 78.0%) and pain scores (I²  = 87. 0%) for tamsulosin versus placebo. There was also high heterogeneity in NIH-CPSI urine scores for the combination of tamsulosin and ciprofloxacin versus tamsulosin (I²  = 66.8%), tamsulosin and levofloxacin versus tamsulosin (I²  = 93.3%), and tamsulosin versus placebo (I²  = 83%).

INTERPRETATION

Pharmacological treatments have little evidence supporting efficacy in CP/CPPS. Future studies could personalise therapy for individuals according to specific symptoms and identify non-pharmacological targets for CP/CPPS.

FUNDING

Dr Jiani Wu received funding for this project from the China Association for Science and Technology (2017QNRC001), the China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences (ZZ13-YQ-027), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82105037).

A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo effect in clinical trials on chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

It is a common practice to control efficacy of pharmacological treatment with a placebo group. However, placebo itself may affect subjective and even objective results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the placebo effect on symptoms of CP/CPPS to improve future clinical trials.

METHODS

A search at three databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials on the treatment of CP/CPPS published until April 2021. The primary outcome - National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and prostate volume.

RESULTS

A total of 3502 studies were identified. Placebo arms of 42 articles (5512 patients, median 31 patients) were included in the systematic review. Systematic review identified positive changes in the primary endpoint, meta-analysis of 10 articles found that NIH-CPSI total score results were significantly influenced by placebo, mean difference -4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.31, -2.09). Mean difference of NIH-CPSI pain domain was -2.31 (95% CI: -3.4, -1.21), urinary domain -1.12 (95% CI: -1.62, -0.62), quality of life domain -1.67 (95% CI: -2.38, -0.96); p < 0.001 for all. In case of the objective indicator - Qmax, there were three articles included in the meta-analysis. Qmax mean change from baseline was 0.68 (95% CI: -0.85, 2.22, p = 0.38). Systematic review showed no significant changes in pain, measured by VAS or other scores, IPSS and PVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo significantly affected the subjective parameters (NIH-CPSI) and limitedly affected various other measurements of pain (visual analog scale, McGill pain questionnaire). There was no long-term effect on IPSS and objective measurements (Qmax, PVR). This study can be used in further clinical trials to develop general rules of CPPS treatment assessment.

Contemporary Management of Chronic Prostatitis

Chronic prostatitis (CP) is a common condition, yet remains a challenge to treat in clinical practice due to the heterogeneity of symptoms. The aim of this article is to undertake a narrative review using key research papers in this field in order to develop a treatment algorithm and research recommendations for the management of type II and type III prostatitis taking a broader look at interventions beyond those recommended in the European Association of Urology Guidelines. A search was performed using multiple databases and trial registries with no language restrictions. Searches were completed on March 1, 2021, with a focus on randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. However, in areas with a dearth of such studies, we included case series and observational studies, thus allowing us to assess current levels of evidence and areas of potential research. We identified and reviewed 63 studies. The level of evidence and the quality of trials were assessed and reported. Research recommendations, where applicable, were also highlighted. CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is a heterogenous term referring to diverse symptomology that requires tailored treatments depending on the patients' complaints. After a review of the evidence available, we present a treatment algorithm that is based on the much-discussed UPOINT (urinary symptoms, psychosocial dysfunction, organ-specific findings, infection, neurologic/systemic, and tenderness of muscles) framework. Future studies should focus on multimodal therapy based on such frameworks and provide the future direction of this complex condition.

Diagnostic and Management Strategies for Patients with Chronic Prostatitis and Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common and often heterogenous condition that can have severe consequences on patient quality of life. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology, diagnostic work-up, and treatment of patients with CP/CPPS incorporating the most recent literature. Studies have demonstrated that CP/CPPS involves a complex pathophysiology, including infectious, immunologic, neurologic, endocrinologic, and psychologic etiologies, with frequent intersections between the different entities. Despite robust research assessing a variety of therapeutics targeting these etiologies, clinical trials have failed to identify an empiric treatment strategy applicable specifically to older adult male patients with CP/CPPS. As such, it can be challenging to manage older male patients with this condition. The advent of clinical phenotyping of patients with CP/CPPS has led to advances in tailored management strategies. Monomodal therapy has been largely unsuccessful because of the unclear and complex etiology of CPPS. As a result, CP/CPPS therapy has transitioned to a multimodal approach, including both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies. The best studied pharmacologic therapies include antibiotics, alpha-blockers, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory agents, phytotherapies, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, hormonal agents, neuromodulatory agents, and antidepressants. The best studied non-pharmacological therapies include pelvic floor physical therapy, myofascial trigger point release, acupuncture and electroacupuncture, psychological support and biofeedback, and electrocorporeal shockwave therapy and local thermotherapy.

Efficacy of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prostatitis is a common urogenital system disease in men which affects 5% to 9% of adult men worldwide and accounts for approximately 8% of visits to urologists. In the past years, its pathogenesis is complicated and the classification of it is not clear, so the effect of treatment measures is not significant. Recently, the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) includes nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, phytotherapy, hormonal therapy, alpha-blockers, anti-anxiolytic, and acupuncture, which provide more choice for the urologist. But there still are some limitations. scholars. Many studies suggest radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy may be the better option in the treatment of CP/CPPS. However, the efficacy and safety of it still lack solid evidence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.org, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wan fang Database, China Biology Medicine Database, VIP Science Technology Periodical Database, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry will be retrieved. All the randomized controlled trials of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT) for patients with CP/CPPS will be included. We will evaluate the outcomes including National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, visual analog scale, international prostate symptom score, international index of erectile function-5, and conduct this study strictly according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

RESULTS

The current study is a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis without results, and data analysis will be carried out after the protocol. We will share our findings on October 31st of 2021.

CONCLUSION

rESWT as a noninvasive treatment with no pain, which will be accepted more easily. Although some studies have suggested that rESWT can relieve the symptoms of patients, the efficacy and safety of it still lack solid evidence. To address this limitation scientifically and systematically, this study will inspect the efficacy and safety of the rESWT treatment in patients with CP/CPPS by integrating various studies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required in this protocol. We will collect and analyze data based on published studies, and since there are no patients involved in this study, individual privacy will not be under concerns. The results of this review will be disseminated to peer-reviewed journals or submit to related conferences.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

INPLASY202090076.

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome: Highlighting medicinal plants toward biomolecules discovery for upcoming drugs formulation

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) can be triggered by a various types of gynecological, gastrointestinal, urological, and musculoskeletal disorders. Recently, the role of the central nervous system has proven to be an integral part on the development of any chronic pain syndrome, including CPPS. However, owing to the complex and heterogeneous etiology and pathophysiology of CPPS, the establishment of effective therapeutic interventions remains challenging for both physicians and patients. Nonetheless, recent studies have pointed that medicinal plants and their secondary metabolites can be effectively used in CPPS therapy, besides contributing to restore the patients' quality of life and potentiate the conventional CPPS management. In this sense, this review aims to provide a careful overview on the biomedical data for the use of medicinal plants use and their secondary metabolites on CPPS management.

Pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms. We considered a 25% decrease of NIH-CPSI baseline score or a six-point reduction as MCID.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings, with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available pharmacological interventions compared to placebo or in head-to-head comparisons.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence (QoE) using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 unique studies in 9119 men with CP/CPPS, with assessments of 16 types of pharmacological interventions. Unless stated otherwise, our comparisons were based on short-term follow-up (less than 12 months). Most studies did not specify their funding sources; 21 studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies.1. Alpha blockers: (24 studies, 2061 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of these drugs on prostatitis symptoms when compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.41 to -2.61; 18 studies, 1524 participants, very low QoE) and at long-term follow-up (MD -5.60, 95% CI -10.89 to -0.32; 4 studies, 235 participants, very low QoE). Alpha blockers may be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events, such as dizziness and postural hypotension (risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.34; 19 studies, 1588 participants; low QoE). Alpha blockers probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction, quality of life and anxiety and depression (moderate to low QoE).2. 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI): (2 studies, 177 participants). Finasteride probably reduces prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -4.60, 95% CI -5.43 to -3.77; 1 study, 64 participants; moderate QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.3. Antibiotics: (6 studies, 693 participants). Antibiotics (quinolones) may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.43, 95% CI -4.72 to -0.15; 5 studies, 372 participants; low QoE) and are probably not associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (moderate QoE). Antibiotics probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction and quality of life (moderate QoE). There was no information on anxiety or depression.4. Anti-inflammatories: (7 studies, 585 participants). Anti-inflammatories may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.74 to -1.26; 7 studies, 585 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.5. Phytotherapy: (7 studies, 551 participants). Phytotherapy may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -5.02, 95% CI -6.81 to -3.23; 5 studies, 320 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). Phytotherapy may not improve sexual dysfunction (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life or anxiety and depression.6. Botulinum toxin A (BTA): Intraprostatic BTA injection (1 study, 60 participants) may cause a large reduction in prostatitis symptom (NIH-CPSI scores MD -25.80, 95% CI -30.15 to -21.45), whereas pelvic floor muscle BTA injection (1 study, 29 participants) may not reduce prostatitis symptoms (low QoE). Both comparisons used a placebo injection. These interventions may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.7. Allopurinol: (2 studies, 110 participants). Allopurinol may result in little to no difference in prostatitis symptoms and adverse events when compared to placebo (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.8. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM): (7 studies, 835 participants); TCM may reduce prostatitis symptoms (NIH-CPSI score, MD -3.13, 95% CI -4.99 to -1.28; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). TCM probably does not improve sexual dysfunction (moderate QoE) and may not improve symptoms of anxiety and depression (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life.The most frequent reasons for downgrading the QoE were study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. We found few trials with active comparators.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to very low-quality evidence that alpha blockers, antibiotics, 5-ARI, anti-inflammatories, phytotherapy, intraprostatic BTA injection, and traditional Chinese medicine may cause a reduction in prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence of adverse events in the short term, except for alpha blockers which may be associated with an increase in mild adverse events. We found few trials with active comparators and little evidence of the effects of these drugs on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods, including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes, including potential treatment-related adverse events, and appropriate sample sizes.

Can Botulinum Toxin A Still Have a Role in Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Through Inhibition of Chronic Prostatic Inflammation?

Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) can exhibit various lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) owing to bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), prostatic inflammation, and bladder response to BOO. The pathogenesis of BPH involves an imbalance of internal hormones and chronic prostatic inflammation, possibly triggered by prostatic infection, autoimmune responses, neurogenic inflammation, oxidative stress, and autonomic dysfunction. Botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) is well recognized for its ability to block acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junction by cleaving synaptosomal-associated proteins. Although current large clinical trials have shown no clinical benefits of BoNT-A for the management of LUTS due to BPH, BoNT-A has demonstrated beneficial effects in certain subsets of BPH patients with LUTS, especially in males with concomitant chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and smaller prostate. We conducted a review of published literature in Pubmed, using Botulinum toxin, BPH, BOO, inflammation, LUTS, and prostatitis as the key words. This article reviewed the mechanisms of BPH pathogenesis and anti-inflammatory effects of BoNT-A. The results suggested that to achieve effectiveness, the treatment of BPH with BoNT-A should be tailored according to more detailed clinical information and reliable biomarkers.

Interventions to chronic prostatitis/Chronic pelvic pain syndrome treatment. Where are we standing and what's next?

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a frustrating syndrome. The pathogenesis and state of the art treatment of CP/CPPS are not known. A wide variety of therapies including anti-inflammatories, antibiotics, alpha-blockers, neuropathic pain modulators, and 5α-reductase inhibitors are in practice. These treatment strategies focus on alleviating symptoms in specific domains without treating root-cause and therapeutic outcome is far from satisfactory. We review the literature on current pharmacological treatments for CP/CPPS in detail and suggest future perspectives to modify the treatment strategies. We suggest that introducing novel treatment strategies such as gene editing, and T_regs expressing chimeric receptors may improve the treatment outcomes by inducing immune tolerance and controlling expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Male CP/CPPS: where do we stand?

INTRODUCTION

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), commonly encountered in urologic practice, carries with it a stigma of poor understanding, ineffective treatment, and significant financial and quality of life burden.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This clinically practical review is based on the authors' personal clinical experience in interpretation and application of currently available evidence.

RESULTS

Significant progress has been made in terms of classification and evaluation of the disease, leading to encouraging improvements in treatment outcomes. The Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (CPSI) is a helpful tool in clinical evaluation and has proven invaluable for research purposes, while UPOINT has demonstrated the heterogeneity of the disease and provides physicians with a uniquely patient-centered approach to treatment. The importance of the microbiome in the evaluation of CP/CPPS patients has yet to be fully appreciated. While personalized, multi-modal therapy appears to be the key to treatment, the addition of pelvic floor physiotherapy (PFPT) with injection of trigger points, and psychosocial therapies to the multi-modal approach armamentarium are promising advances. Innovative interventional approaches are encouraging but require study.

CONCLUSIONS

While encouraging therapies have been added to personalized, multi-modal treatment strategies, newer innovative therapies appear promising for improved treatment of CP/CPPS patients.

Comprehensive overview of prostatitis

Prostatitis is a common urinary tract syndrome that many doctors find problematic to treat effectively. It is the third most commonly found urinary tract disease in men after prostate cancer and Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatitis may account for 25% of all office visits made to the urological clinics complaining about the genital and urinary systems all over the world. In the present study, we classified prostatitis and comprehensively elaborated the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of acute bacterial prostatitis (category I), chronic bacterial prostatitis (category II), chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) (category III), and asymptomatic prostatitis (category IV). In addition, we also tried to get some insights about other types of prostatitis-like fungal, viral and gonococcal prostatitis. The aim of this review is to present the detail current perspective of prostatitis in a single review. To the best of our knowledge currently, there is not a single comprehensive review, which can completely elaborate this important topic in an effective way. Furthermore, this review will provide a solid platform to conduct future studies on different aspects such as risk factors, mechanism of pathogenesis, proper diagnosis, and rational treatment plans for fungal, viral, and gonococcal prostatitis.

Assessing finasteride-associated sexual dysfunction using the FAERS database

BACKGROUND

Postmarketing reports suggest that finasteride causes sexual dysfunction despite a low incidence reported in clinical trials. Therefore, the extent of risk remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the risk of sexual dysfunction is higher among individuals treated with finasteride compared to a baseline risk for all other drugs using the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

METHODS

A case by non-case disproportionality approach was used whereby a reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) was used to confirm results.

RESULTS

A significant disproportionality in reporting of sexual dysfunction with the use of finasteride was observed whether finasteride was indicated for hair loss (ROR = 138.17, 95% CI: 133.13, 143.4), prostatic hyperplasia (ROR = 93.88, 95% CI: 84.62, 104.16) or any indication (ROR = 173.18, 95% CI: 171.08, 175.31). When these results were stratified by age, disproportionality was strongest at 31-45 years.

CONCLUSION

Use of finasteride has led to an increase in reports of sexual dysfunction where it is believed to be the primary suspect.

Use of the UPOINT Classification in Turkish Chronic Prostatitis or Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome Patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine the positive subdomain numbers and distribution of the UPOINT classification in chronic prostatitis and to compare the erectile dysfunction (ED) pattern.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2008 to 2013, 839 patients with symptomatic chronic prostatitis or chronic pelvic pain syndrome were included in this study. The correlation between UPOINT domains and National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI) total score, subscores, and the 5-item International Index of Erectile Function scores were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was calculated as 37.7 ± 7.4 (range 21-65). The average total NIH-CPSI score was determined as 9.07 (range 1-40) and the average positive UPOINT subdomain number was determined as 2.87 ± 0.32 (range 1-6). Subdomain patient numbers and rates were calculated as 529 urinary (63%), 462 psychosocial (55%), 382 organ specific (45%), 290 infection (34%), 288 neurological or systemic (34%), and 418 tenderness (skeletal muscle) (50%), respectively. It was determined that ED, determining the subdomain of sexual dysfunction in patients, was positive in a total of 326 (39.9%) patients, with 220 patients having mild (26.2%), 76 mild to moderate (9.1%), 19 moderate (2.3%), and 5 with severe (0.6%) ED. A statistically significant correlation was not determined between the 5-item International Index of Erectile Function score and UPOINT subdomain number and NIH-CPSI score.

CONCLUSION

It has been determined that although there is a strong and significant correlation between UPOINT classification and NIH-CPSI score in Turkish patients with chronic prostatitis or chronic pelvic pain syndrome, the inclusion of ED as an independent subdomain to the UPOINT classification is not statistically significant.

Inflammation in Benign Prostate Tissue and Prostate Cancer in the Finasteride Arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial

BACKGROUND

A previous analysis of the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) reported 82% overall prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation and identified a link between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer and serum PSA. Here, we studied these associations in the PCPT finasteride arm.

METHODS

Prostate cancer cases (N = 197) detected either on a clinically indicated biopsy or on protocol-directed end-of-study biopsy, and frequency-matched controls (N = 248) with no cancer on an end-of-study biopsy were sampled from the finasteride arm. Inflammation in benign prostate tissue was visually assessed using digital images of hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections. Logistic regression was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In the finasteride arm, 91.6% of prostate cancer cases and 92.4% of controls had at least one biopsy core with inflammation in benign areas (P < 0.001 for difference compared with placebo arm). Overall, the odds of prostate cancer did not differ by prevalence [OR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.44-1.84] or extent (P trend = 0.68) of inflammation. Inflammation was not associated with higher-grade disease (prevalence: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.43-2.69). Furthermore, mean PSA concentration did not differ by the prevalence or extent of inflammation in either cases or controls.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of intraprostatic inflammation was higher in the finasteride than placebo arm of the PCPT, with no association with higher-grade prostate cancer.

IMPACT

Finasteride may attenuate the association between inflammation and higher-grade prostate cancer. Moreover, the missing link between intraprostatic inflammation and PSA suggests that finasteride may reduce inflammation-associated PSA elevation.

Contemporary Management of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

CONTEXT

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition that causes severe symptoms, bother, and quality-of-life impact in the 8.2% of men who are believed to be affected. Research suggests a complex pathophysiology underlying this syndrome that is mirrored by its heterogeneous clinical presentation. Management of patients diagnosed with CP/CPPS has always been a formidable task in clinical practice. Due to its enigmatic etiology, a plethora of clinical trials failed to identify an efficient monotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

A comprehensive review of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the treatment of CP/CPPS and practical best evidence recommendations for management.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medline and the Cochrane database were screened for RCTs on the treatment of CP/CPPS from 1998 to December 2014, using the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index as an objective outcome measure. Published data in concert with expert opinion were used to formulate a practical best evidence statement for the management of CP/CPPS.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twenty-eight RCTs identified were eligible for this review and presented. Trials evaluating antibiotics, α-blockers, anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating substances, hormonal agents, phytotherapeutics, neuromodulatory drugs, agents that modify bladder function, and physical treatment options failed to reveal a clear therapeutic benefit. With its multifactorial pathophysiology and its various clinical presentations, the management of CP/CPPS demands a phenotypic-directed approach addressing the individual clinical profile of each patient. Different categorization algorithms have been proposed. First studies applying the UPOINTs classification system provided promising results. Introducing three index patients with CP/CPPS, we present practical best evidence recommendations for management.

CONCLUSIONS

Our current understanding of the pathophysiology underlying CP/CPPS resulting in this highly variable syndrome does not speak in favor of a monotherapy for management. No efficient monotherapeutic option is available. The best evidence-based management of CP/CPPS strongly suggests a multimodal therapeutic approach addressing the individual clinical phenotypic profile.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome presents a variable syndrome. Successful management of this condition is challenging. It appears that a tailored treatment strategy addressing individual patient characteristics is more effective than one single therapy.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a consensus guideline

Objectives

To improve awareness and recognition of chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) among non‐specialists and patients. To provide guidance to healthcare professionals treating patients with CBP and CP/CPPS, in both non‐specialist and specialist settings. To promote efficient referral of care between non‐specialists and specialists and the involvement of the multidisciplinary team (MDT).

Patients and Methods

The guideline population were men with CBP or CP/CPPS (persistent or recurrent symptoms and no other urogenital pathology for ≥3 of the previous 6 months). Consensus recommendations for the guidelines were based on a search to identify literature on the diagnosis and management of CBP and CP/CPPS (published between 1999 and February 2014). A Delphi panel process was used where high‐quality, published evidence was lacking.

Results

CBP and CP/CPPS can present with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The four main symptom domains are urogenital pain, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS – voiding or storage symptoms), psychological issues and sexual dysfunction. Patients should be managed according to their individual symptom pattern. Options for first‐line treatment include antibiotics, α‐adrenergic antagonists (if voiding LUTS are present) and simple analgesics. Repeated use of antibiotics, such as quinolones, should be avoided if there is no obvious symptomatic benefit from infection control or cultures do not support an infectious cause. Early use of treatments targeting neuropathic pain and/or referral to specialist services should be considered for patients who do not respond to initial measures. An MDT approach (urologists, pain specialists, nurse specialists, specialist physiotherapists, general practitioners, cognitive behavioural therapists/psychologists, and sexual health specialists) is recommended. Patients should be fully informed about the possible underlying causes and treatment options, including an explanation of the chronic pain cycle.

Conclusion

Chronic prostatitis can present with a wide variety of signs and symptoms. Identification of individual symptom patterns and a symptom‐based treatment approach are recommended. Further research is required to evaluate management options for CBP and CP/CPPS.

Updates on therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Prostatitis comprises of a group of syndromes that affect almost 50% of men at least once in their lifetime and makeup the majority of visits to the Urology Clinics. After much debate, it has been divided into four distinct categories by National Institutes of Health namely (1) acute bacterial prostatitis; (2) chronic bacterial prostatitis; (3) chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) which is further divided into inflammatory and non-inflammatory CP/CPPS; and (4) asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis. CP/CPPS has been a cause of great concern for both patients and physicians because of the lack of presence of thorough information about the etiological factors along with the difficult-to-treat nature of the syndrome. For the presented manuscript an extensive search on PubMed was conducted for CP/CPPS aimed to present an updated review on the evaluation and treatment options available for patients with CP/CPPS. Several diagnostic criteria’s have been established to diagnose CP/CPPS, with prostatic/pelvic pain for at least 3 mo being the major classifying symptom along with the presence of lower urinary tract symptoms and/or ejaculatory pain. Diagnostic tests can help differentiate CP/CPPS from other syndromes that come under the heading of prostatitis by ruling out active urinary tract infection and/or prostatic infection with uropathogen by performing urine cultures, Meares-Stamey Four Glass Test, Pre- and Post-Massage Two Glass Test. Asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis is confirmed through prostate biopsy done for elevated serum prostate-specific antigen levels or abnormal digital rectal examination. Researchers have been unable to link a single etiological factor to the pathogenesis of CP/CPPS, instead a cluster of potential etiologies including atypical bacterial or nanobacterial infection, autoimmunity, neurological dysfunction and pelvic floor muscle dysfunction are most commonly implicated. Initially monotherapy with anti-biotics and alpha adrenergic-blockers can be tried, but its success has only been observed in treatment naïve population. Other pharmacotherapies including phytotherapy, neuromodulatory drugs and anti-inflammatories achieved limited success in trials. Complementary and interventional therapies including acupuncture, myofascial trigger point release and pelvic floor biofeedback have been employed. This review points towards the fact that treatment should be tailored individually for patients based on their symptoms. Patients can be stratified phenotypically based on the UPOINT system constituting of Urinary, Psychosocial, Organ-specific, Infectious, Neurologic/Systemic and symptoms of muscular Tenderness and the treatment algorithm should be proposed accordingly. Treatment of CP/CPPS should be aimed towards treating local as well as central factors causing the symptoms. Surgical intervention can cause significant morbidity and should only be reserved for treatment-refractory patients that have previously failed to respond to multiple drug therapies.

Use of the UPOINT phenotype system in treating Chinese patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a prospective study

The urinary, psychosocial, organ-specific, infection, neurological/systemic and tenderness (UPOINT) phenotype system has been validated to be an effective phenotype system in classifying patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) in western populations. To validate the utility of the UPOINT system and evaluate the effect of multimodal therapy based on the UPOINT system in Chinese patients with CP/CPPS, we performed this study. Chinese patients with CP/CPPS were prospectively offered multimodal therapy using the UPOINT system and re-examined after 6 months. A minimum 6-point drop in National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptoms Index (NIH-CPSI) was set to be the primary endpoint. Finally, 140 patients were enrolled in the study. The percentage of patients with each domain was 59.3%, 45.0%, 49.3%, 22.1%, 37.9%, and 56.4% for the UPOINT, respectively. The number of positive domains significantly correlated with symptom severity, which is measured by total NIH-CPSI scores (r = 0.796, P< 0.001). Symptom duration was associated with a greater number of positive domains (r = 0.589, P< 0.001). With 6 months follow-up at least, 75.0% (105/140) had at least a 6-point improvement in NIH-CPSI after taking the therapy. All NIH-CPSI scores were significantly improved from original ones: pain 10.14 ± 4.26 to 6.60 ± 3.39, urinary 6.29 ± 2.42 to 3.63 ± 1.52, quality of life 6.56 ± 2.44 to 4.06 ± 1.98, and total 22.99 ± 7.28 to 14.29 ± 5.70 (all P< 0.0001). Our study indicates that the UPOINT system is clinically feasible in classifying Chinese patients with CP/CPPS and directing therapy.

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a clinical enigma

Chronic nonbacterial prostatitis is an ill-defined, painful clinical condition that is characterized by various nonspecific symptoms, some of which are related to urination or the male reproductive organs. Urologists diagnose this particular condition when the symptoms are not associated with urinary bacterial growth before and after transrectal prostate massage. In this review, we describe the recommended and optional tests that can be performed in these cases. There is significant overlap between chronic nonbacterial prostatitis and other unexplained pain conditions, raising the question as to whether the prostate is the culprit. The sources and mediators of pain and the psychological aspects of this complex condition are discussed. Treatments consist of traditional antibiotics and α-blockers. Because the pain relief is often temporary, patients seek other solutions. Various therapeutics have been introduced to satisfy the expectations of patients and physicians. We discuss other pain medications, as well as intraprostatic drug injections and shockwave therapy. Importantly, however, not all of these suggestions have been widely accepted by urologists or pain clinics.

Prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

The prevalence of prostatitis is extremely high, with up to 16% of men diagnosed with prostatitis at some point throughout their lifetime. However, the etiology appears to be multifactorial and standard treatment regimens have been altered significantly in recent years. The purpose of this review is to examine the changing scientific views on the causes and treatment of prostatitis, chronic prostaitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome. We review the infectious and noninfectious etiology of the disease, examining the role of antimicrobial treatment in eradicating infection as well as ameliorating symptoms. Current NIH classifications, which stratify prostatitis into four categories, are discussed, as is the NIH Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, the primary tool used to assess symptomatology. Diagnostic examinations are studying the need for the four-glass test and its practical replacement by the two-glass test. Multimodal treatment therapy is then discussed, including recent data on biofeedback and evaluation of the role of pelvic floor dysfunction in prostatitis.

Alternative therapies in the management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

PURPOSE

Standard medical therapy for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS) including such agents as nonsteriodal anti-inflammatories, alpha-blockers, antimicrobial therapy, and 5a-reductase inhibitors has not been uniformly effective. The purpose of this review is to focus on the role of alternative therapies available for the management of CP/CPPS.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature for articles published in PubMed up to 2012 pertaining to commonly employed alternative therapies.

RESULTS

The evidence for alternative therapies such as diet and lifestyle modifications, phytotherapy, acupuncture, myofascial physical therapy, and stress management/cognitive behavioral therapy is reviewed.

CONCLUSION

CP/CPPS often requires a multimodal approach and alternative therapies should be considered as adjuncts in the treatment of refractory CP/CPPS patients.

Management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS): the studies, the evidence, and the impact

INTRODUCTION

The development of an accepted clinical definition, classification system and validated outcome questionnaire for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) has led to a flurry of clinical trial activity over the last 15 years.

METHODS

Twenty-four of these studies enrolled a homogeneous population of CP/CPPS patients, were prospective randomized placebo or sham controlled, and employed the National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (CPSI) as an outcome parameter.

RESULTS

This review of the evidence and clinical impact from these studies suggests that physician's strict adherence to a rigid evidence-based approach for the treatment of a CP/CPPS patient will result in disappointed patients as well as disappointed physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no one particular treatment that shows significant clinical efficacy to be recommended as a mono-therapy for CP/CPPS. Therefore, the physician must adapt his knowledge and interpretation of the evidence from randomized placebo- and sham-controlled trials to determine what therapy or therapies are best indicated for each individual patient.

Metabolic syndrome and lower urinary tract symptoms: the role of inflammation

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological data indicate that lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/BPH can be associated with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Chronic inflammation has been proposed as a candidate mechanism at the crossroad between these two clinical entities.Aim of study is to examine the correlation among pre-operatory LUTS/BPH severity, MetS features and inflammatory infiltrates in prostatectomy specimens.

METHODS

A total of 271 consecutive men treated with simple prostatectomy were retrospectively selected for this study in two tertiary referral centers for LUTS/BPH. Prostate diameters and volume were measured by transrectal ultrasound, LUTS scored by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and obstruction by uroflowmetry. The International Diabetes Federation and American Heart Association and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute was used to define MetS. The inflammatory infiltrate was investigated combining anatomic location, grade and extent of flogosis into the overall inflammatory score (IS); the glandular disruption (GD) was used as a further marker.

RESULTS

Eighty-six (31.7%) men were affected by MetS. Prostatic volume and anterior-posterior (AP) diameter were positively associated to the number of MetS components. Among MetS determinants, only dyslipidaemia (increased serum triglycerides and reduced serum high-density lipoprotein) was associated with an increased risk of having a prostatic volume >60 cm(3) (hazard ratio (HR) = 3.268, P < 0.001). A significant positive correlation between the presence of MetS and the IS was observed. MetS patients presented lower uroflowmetric parameters as compared with those without MetS (Maximum flow rate (Q(max)): 8.6 vs 10.1, P = 0.008 and average flow rate (Q(ave)): 4.6 vs 5.3, P = 0.033, respectively), and higher obstructive urinary symptoms score (P = 0.064). A positive correlation among both IS-GD and IPSS Score was also observed (adjusted r = 0.172, P = 0.008 and adjusted r = 0.128, P = 0.050).

CONCLUSIONS

MetS is associated with prostate volume, prostatic AP diameter and intraprostatic IS. The significantly positive association between MetS and prostatic AP diameter could support the observation that MetS patients presented lower uroflowmetric parameters. In conclusion, MetS can be regarded as a new determinant of prostate inflammation and BPH progression.

Therapeutic intervention for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) has been treated with several different interventions with limited success. This meta-analysis aims to review all trials reporting on therapeutic intervention for CP/CPPS using the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI).

METHODS

We searched Medline, PubMed, the Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the NIDDK website between 1947 and December 31, 2011 without language or study type restrictions. All RCTs for CP/CPPS lasting at least 6 weeks, with a minimum of 10 participants per arm, and using the NIH-CPSI score, the criterion standard for CP/CPPS, as an outcome measure were included. Data was extracted from each study by two independent reviewers. Gillbraith and I-squared plots were used for heterogeneity testing and Eggers and Peters methods for publication bias. Quality was assessed using a component approach and meta-regression was used to analyze sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Mepartricin, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS), and triple therapy comprised of doxazosin + ibuprofen + thiocolchicoside (DIT) resulted in clinically and statistically significant reduction in NIH-CPSI total score. The same agents and aerobic exercise resulted in clinically and statistically significant NIH-CPSI pain domain score reduction. Acupuncture, DIT, and PTNS were found to produce statistically and clinically significant reductions in the NIH-CPSI voiding domain. A statistically significant placebo effect was found for all outcomes and time analysis showed that efficacy of all treatments increased over time. Alpha-blockers, antibiotics, and combinations of the two failed to show statistically or clinically significant NIH-CPSI reductions.

CONCLUSION

Results from this meta-analysis reflect our current inability to effectively manage CP/CPPS. Clinicians and researchers must consider placebo effect and treatment efficacy over time and design studies creatively so we can more fully elucidate the etiology and role of therapeutic intervention in CP/CPPS.

α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatories have a role in the management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Study Type - Therapy (systematic review) Level of Evidence 1a. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Individual clinical trials evaluating antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and α-blockers for the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome have shown only modest or even no benefits for patients compared with placebo, yet we continue to use these agents in selected patients with some success in clinical practice. This network meta-analysis of current evidence from all available randomized placebo-controlled trials with similar inclusion criteria and outcome measures shows that these '3-As' of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome treatment (antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and α-blockers) do offer benefits to some patients, particularly if we use them strategically in selected individuals.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an updated network meta-analysis mapping α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatories (the 3-As) in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). • To use the results of this meta-analysis to comment on the role of the 3-As in clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We updated a previous review including only randomized controlled studies employing the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) as one of the outcomes to compare treatment effects in CP/CPPS patients. • A longitudinal mixed regression model (network meta-analysis) was applied to indirectly assess multiple treatment comparisons (i.e. α-blockers, antibiotics, anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapies, α-blockers plus antibiotics, and placebo).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (1669 subjects) were eligible for analysis. • α-blockers, antibiotics and anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapies were associated with significant improvement in symptoms when compared with placebo, with mean differences of total CPSI of -10.8 (95% CI -13.2 to -8.3; P < 0.001), -9.7 (95% CI -14.2 to -5.3; P < 0.001) and -1.7 (95% CI -3.2 to -0.2; P= 0.032) respectively, while α-blockers plus antibiotics resulted in the greatest CPSI difference (-13.6, 95% CI -16.7 to -10.6; P < 0.001). • With respect to responder analysis compared with placebo, anti-inflammatories showed the greatest response rates (risk ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.1; P < 0.001) followed by α-blockers (risk ratio 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.8; P= 0.013) and antibiotics (risk ratio 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9; P= 0.527).

CONCLUSIONS

α-blockers, antibiotics and/or anti-inflammatory/immune modulation therapy appear to be beneficial for some patients with CP/CPPS. • The magnitude of effect and the disconnect between mean CPSI decrease and response rates compared with placebo suggest that directed multimodal therapy, rather than mono-therapy, with these agents should be considered for optimal management of CP/CPPS.

Identification, pharmacologic considerations, and management of prostatitis

BACKGROUND

Prostatitis is a collection of signs and symptoms that occur as a result of inflammation or swelling of the prostate gland. There are many different causes for prostatitis, including infection; occasionally no clear etiology for the inflammation is found. Effective treatment often depends on identification of the cause, but a microbiologic organism is not always detectable, especially in cases of chronic prostatitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to review identification and treatment options for prostatitis, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions.

METHODS

Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-June 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-June 2010), and EMBASE (1947-June 2010). Randomized, controlled trials that examined prostate cancer, benign prostatic hypertrophy, or procedures related to the prostate (ie, biopsies) were excluded.

RESULTS

A working classification system for prostatitis was developed in 1999, but there are few randomized controlled trials that distinguish between the various treatment options. Bacterial prostatitis can be acute or chronic but always requires some degree of antimicrobial therapy. Pharmacologic features of fluoroquinolones make them the preferred agents for most patients. These antibiotics can become trapped in a chronically inflamed prostate due to pH differences between prostatic tissue and serum. Many fluoroquinolones have penetration ratios (prostate level:serum level) of up to 4:1. A study in European men (N = 117) who received levofloxacin 500 mg/d with a diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis demonstrated clinical success rates of 92% (95% CI 84.8%-96.5%), 77.4% (95% CI, 68.2-84.9%), 66.0% (95% CI, 56.2%-75.0%), and 61.9% (95% CI, 51.9%-71.2%) at 5-12 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment. Additionally, there have been numerous randomized, placebo-controlled trials in patients with chronic prostatitis that have studied α-blockers, steroid inhibitors, anti-inflammatory agents, and bioflavonoids. Treatment responses to α-blockers appear to be greater with longer durations of therapy in α-blocker-naïve patients (National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index [NIH-CPSI] score reduction of at least 3.6 points after 6 weeks of tamsulosin therapy [P = 0.04] and up to 14.3 and 9.9 point NIH-CPSI score reductions with 14 weeks of terazosin and 24 weeks of alfuzosin therapy, respectively [P = 0.01 for both]). Combination therapy with an α-blocker, an anti-inflammatory, and a muscle relaxant does not appear to offer significant advantages over monotherapy (12.7 vs 12.4 point reduction in NIH-CPSI scores) and a stepwise approach to therapy involving antibiotics followed by bioflavonoids and then α-blockers appears to effectively reduce symptoms for up to 1 year in patients with chronic prostatitis (mean NIH-CPSI point reduction of 9.5 points compared with baseline, P < 0.0001). Patients who have had multiple unsuccessful treatment regimens may benefit from direct stimulation of the pelvic muscles through electromagnetic or electroacupuncture therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostatitis can resemble various other medical conditions but proper classification and an understanding of the pharmacologic features and expectations of the medications used to treat it can help identify effective treatment strategies. Fluoroquinolones are the preferred agents for treating bacterial causes of prostatitis and have demonstrated efficacy in some cases of chronic prostatitis when an organism has not been identified. However, the use of agents with anti-inflammatory or antiadrenergic properties may be necessary in combination with or after trying antimicrobial agents.

Dutasteride reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with placebo in men enrolled in the REDUCE study

PURPOSE

Men at risk for prostate cancer may concurrently experience chronic prostatitis or pelvic pain. We evaluated the effect of dutasteride on prostatitis-like symptoms in the REDUCE study population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

REDUCE was a 4-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study of prostate cancer risk reduction with 0.5 mg dutasteride vs placebo in men 50 to 75 years old with prostate specific antigen 2.5 to 10 ng/ml and a negative prostate biopsy in the previous 6 months. In this analysis we investigated change from baseline in Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index in men with prostatitis-like pain (Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index pain subscore 5 or greater) and prostatitis-like syndrome (perineal or ejaculatory pain plus Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index pain subscore 4 or greater), the proportion of subjects with at least a moderate Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index response (6-unit or greater improvement) and reports of new onset clinical prostatitis.

RESULTS

Of 5,379 men with a total baseline Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index score 678 (12.6%) had prostatitis-like pain and 427 (7.9%) had prostatitis-like syndrome. Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index total score decreased significantly at 48 months in the dutasteride group vs placebo in men with prostatitis-like pain (p <0.0001) and with prostatitis-like syndrome (t test p = 0.03). There were significantly more Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index responders with dutasteride vs placebo in the prostatitis-like pain (49% vs 37%, respectively, p = 0.0033) and prostatitis-like syndrome (46% vs 35%, Fisher's exact test p = 0.0265) subgroups. Prostatitis was reported as an adverse event by significantly more men randomized to placebo (3.6%) than to dutasteride (2.5%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term dutasteride therapy resulted in improvement in prostatitis related symptoms in older men with an increased prostate specific antigen.

Tamsulosin Monotherapy versus Combination Therapy with Antibiotics or Anti-Inflammatory Agents in the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Purpose

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is treated by use of various protocols. We compared tamsulosin monotherapy with tamsulosin in combination with antibiotics or anti-inflammatory agents and evaluated the efficacy of these treatments in patients with CPPS.

Methods

Patients (n=107) who were younger than 55 years and diagnosed with CPPS were randomly assigned to treatment with tamsulosin at 0.2 mg (group A), tamsulosin at 0.2 mg plus anti-inflammatory drugs (group B) or tamsulosin at 0.2 mg plus antibiotics (group C) daily. We applied the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) to evaluate 100 patients who were treated for 12 weeks (7 withdrew). Scores of the three groups were compared by analysis of variance and we also evaluated subscores, which included pain, voiding and quality of life (QoL).

Results

All three groups showed statistically significant decreases in NIH-CPSI score, IPSS and subscore scores (P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups except for the QoL domain of the IPSS (group A vs. C; P<0.01).

Conclusions

Tamsulosin monotherapy for 12 weeks was effective for treating patients with CPPS, compared with combination therapy with antibiotics or anti-inflammatory drugs.

Prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome in men

Primary care physicians can and should diagnose, classify, and treat patients presenting with acute and chronic prostatitis syndromes. Although the chronic syndromes are a challenge to manage, this review article provides the necessary background to allow primary care physicians to take on this task. Patients who are unfortunate to be diagnosed with a prostatitis syndrome have the best chance for successful therapy at initial presentation. Those patients will ultimately benefit from an informed and educated physician.

Pharmacotherapy of prostatitis

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Prostatitis is a prevalent and morbid condition with a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The four distinct prostatitis syndromes have different pathophysiologies, therapy and prognosis. Acute and chronic bacterial prostatitis is best treated with appropriate antibiotics that penetrate the prostate and kill the causative organisms. The most challenging category to treat is category III or chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

AREAS COVERED IN THE REVIEW

This review covers the categories of prostatitis and currently recommended therapies, as well as novel approaches on the horizon.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Knowledge of the current framework for the diagnosis and management of the diverse prostatitis spectrum.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Prostatitis is a diverse group of syndromes. Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a multifactorial syndrome that requires a multimodal approach to effectively treat the patient. The UPOINT technique is used to clinically phenotype these patients and drive the selection of multimodal therapy.

Phenotypic approach to the management of the chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

• Our traditional approach to managing the chronic prostatitis (CP) syndromes has not been very successful for many of our patients. • Our developing understanding of CP/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) as a heterogeneous syndrome rather than a homogenous disease has allowed us to develop treatment strategies based on individual patient characteristics. • By considering each patient as a unique individual and tailoring treatments to a specific patient's clinical 'phenotype' we improve our therapeutic outcomes.

[Specific treatments for chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To review the treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature was performed by searching the Medline database (National Library of Medicine). Search terms were either Medical subject heading (MeSH) keywords (antibacterial agents, pelvic pain, placebos, prostatitis, treatment) or terms derived from the title or abstract. Search terms were used alone or in combinations by using the "AND" operator. The literature search was conducted from 1990 to the present time.

RESULTS

The treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis is based on the use of antibiotics, primarily fluoroquinolones, for 4 to 6 weeks, but no consensus has been reached concerning the standard treatment of CP/CPPS. A review of the literature failed to identify any recognized and validated treatments for CP/CPPS, but several conclusions can be drawn: placebo gives satisfactory results in a considerable number of patients; antibiotics are not recommended; alpha-blocking agents may be effective in recently diagnosed, previously untreated patients, provided they are prescribed for 12 weeks to 6 months; invasive surgery of the prostate and bladder neck is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

Progress in the treatment of CP/CPPS will require more extensive basic and clinical research. Only randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials including a large number of patients, and using the NIH-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index questionnaire (NIH-CPSI) as evaluation tool will be able to provide reliable conclusions. The use of patient subgroups selected according to the predominant symptoms could be contributive.

Use of the UPOINT chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome classification in European patient cohorts: sexual function domain improves correlations

PURPOSE

Patients with chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome are difficult to treat due to the unknown etiology and complex clinical presentation. Clinical phenotyping may better correlate with multimodal treatment concepts than a current diagnosis. We evaluated a novel clinical phenotyping system in a database of patients with chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome at 2 European institutions and correlated it with patient symptoms. We also investigated the addition of a sexual dysfunction domain in regard to symptom correlation and system internal consistency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively classified 937 patients from Milan, Italy, and 290 from Giessen, Germany, with chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome into a 6-domain phenotyping system, consisting of urinary, psychosocial, organ specific, infection, neurological and muscle tenderness domains, termed UPOINT. Symptom severity was assessed by the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index and the International Prostate Symptom Score.

RESULTS

There was significant correlation between the number of positive UPOINT domains and Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index/International Prostate Symptom Score symptoms in the total and Italian cohorts but not in the German cohort. After adding a sexual dysfunction domain to create the modified UPOINTS system phenotypic domains also correlated significantly with Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index symptoms in the German cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistency of the UPOINT chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome clinical phenotyping system was generally confirmed by our study and further refined by adding a sexual dysfunction domain. The treatment effect of clinical phenotyping with UPOINT(S) must be extensively evaluated in prospective treatment studies.

Pharmacotherapy strategies in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome management

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is one of the most common diagnoses arising out of urologic office visits. It is a costly problem and sufferers compare the effect of this syndrome on quality of life as being similar to the effects of diabetes mellitus and myocardial infarction. The syndrome is variable in presentation and symptom management and efficacy will vary between inflicted men.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

CP/CPPS is not highly responsive to therapy. As such, it is often a waxing and waning illness with symptoms in multiple domains, including urinary symptoms, pain and ejaculatory dysfunction. The pharmacotherapeutic options and management strategies for CP/CPPS presented in this review are based on the published literature from September 1989 to January 2010. When available, randomized, placebo-controlled studies were reviewed to aid in making definitive recommendations for treatment strategies.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

The reader will be familiarized with the commonly used classes of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical therapies. Readers will then use the efficacy data to inform treatment decisions for patients with disparate symptomatology. This will be crystallized in the author's treatment algorithm and summary statement.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Many practitioners use antimicrobials as a first-line agent, particularly a fluoroquinolone, such as levofloxacin. Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole is another medication alternative, with comparable response rates. Many afflicted men will have significant improvement on a 4- to 6-week regimen of a fluoroquinolone antibiotic. Second-line pharmacotherapy includes alpha-blockers, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors and anti-inflammatories for men with urinary symptoms or pain as a predominant symptom domain. Other pharmacotherapy includes steroids, glycosaminoglycans and phytotherapy. Surgical options are generally not recommended for CP/CPPS. Despite the lack of curative therapies, effective symptom management can be achieved with knowledge of the classes of pharmacotherapy. Therapeutic decisions can be based on the symptoms of the patient. Pelvic floor physical therapy is a useful second-line therapy in the author's opinion, but randomized controlled trials and standardization of technique for CP/CPPS are needed before recommendations can be substantiated.

Phenotypically directed multimodal therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a prospective study using UPOINT

OBJECTIVES

Large, controlled trials in chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) have failed due to patient heterogeneity. To phenotype CPPS patients, we developed the UPOINT system with 6 domains (Urinary, Psychosocial, Organ-Specific, Infection, Neurologic/Systemic and Tenderness). In this study, we treated patients with multimodal therapy based on the UPOINT phenotype and measured response after at least 6 months.

METHODS

Patients with CPPS were offered multimodal therapy based on the UPOINT phenotype (eg, Urinary: alpha blocker or antimuscarinic; Organ-specific: quercetin; Tenderness: physical therapy). One hundred patients agreed to therapy and were reexamined after 26 weeks. Primary endpoint was a minimum 6-point drop in NIH-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (CPSI).

RESULTS

Mean age was 46 years, and median symptom duration was 24 months. A median of 3 UPOINT domains were positive, the most common being Organ-specific (70%), Tenderness (64%), and Urinary (59%). With a median 50-week follow-up, 84% had at least a 6-point fall in CPSI. Number of domains and initial CPSI did not predict response. Mean changes (+/-SD) for CPSI subscores were pain 11.5+/-3.2 to 6.1+/-3.9, urine 4.7+/-3.1 to 2.6+/-2.0, QOL 9.1+/-2.3 to 4.5+/-2.8, and total 25.2+/-6.1 to 13.2+/-7.2 (all P<.0001). No domain predicted outcome; however, quercetin use resulted in a greater CPSI decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal therapy using UPOINT leads to significant improvement in symptoms and quality of life. Moreover, a placebo-controlled trial for every therapy combination is not feasible, and results using UPOINT compare favorably with all large trials of monotherapy.

New treatments for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition among men of a wide age range, with detrimental effects on quality of life. The etiology, pathogenesis, and optimal treatment of CP/CPPS remain unknown, although progress has been made in these domains in recent years. A wide variety of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies have been studied in clinical trials, but most have shown limited efficacy in symptom alleviation. CP/CPPS is increasingly viewed as a condition that involves variable degrees of neuropathic pain. Medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, memantine, and tricyclic antidepressants are often used in other neuropathic pain conditions and, therefore, are considered potential treatments for CP/CPPS. Few studies of these agents in patients with CP/CPPS have been reported, but future clinical trials should help to determine their utility and to characterize the pathogenetic mechanisms of pain in CP/CPPS. Combining treatment trials with biomarker, genomic, and imaging studies, in addition to epidemiologic and symptom-based assessments, will maximize the ability to probe disease etiology and pathogenesis, as well as identify effective treatment.

Phenotypic approach to the management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

There is no one unifying etiological mechanism or specific curative therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). However, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that each of the proposed mechanisms may be important in some patients, and that many of our evaluated treatments do in fact work in subgroups of patients. We hypothesize that CP/CPPS patients are not a homogenous group suffering from a single disease entity. Rather, CP/CPPS patients are actually unique individuals with differing clinical phenotypes based on various etiological mechanisms with distinctive symptom complexes and progression trajectories. We call this the "Snow Flake Hypothesis." We propose the UPOINT (urinary, psychosocial, organ-specific, infection, neurologic/systemic, and tenderness domains) clinical phenotyping classification; we have validated the concept in a CP/CPPS cohort and have suggested that phenotypically directed therapy will improve our clinical treatment outcomes.

Chronic inflammation in the pathogenesis of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common disorder affecting 50-80% of the aged male population. Androgens and age have been traditionally considered the main determinants of prostate enlargement, but in the last years a potentially important role of chronic inflammation in BPH pathogenesis has emerged. Bacterial and non-infectious chronic prostatitis could represent inciting factors leading to tissue hyperproliferation, possibly via the recently demonstrated antigen-presenting capacity of prostatic stromal cells, enabling them to induce and sustain intraglandular immune responses. The prostate growth-promoting chemokine IL-8 could represent a direct link between chronic prostate inflammation and autocrine/paracrine stromal cell proliferation, in agreement with its marked secretion induced in BPH stromal cells by a combination of Th1 and Th17 cell-derived inflammatory cytokines. BPH stromal cells express the vitamin D receptor (VDR), which is up-regulated by exposure to inflammatory stimuli. The non-hypercalcaemic VDR agonist elocalcitol, shown to arrest BPH development by decreasing the intra-prostatic androgen signalling without directly interfering with systemic androgen action, exerts immunoregulatory and anti-inflammatory properties in different prostatic pathology characterized by growth and inflammation. The mechanism of action of VDR agonists supports an important role of chronic inflammation in BPH pathogenesis and strengthens the concept of these agents as a therapeutic option for pharmacological treatment of BPH.