Solace Therapeutics, Inc., a medical device company focused on the development of nonsurgical bladder control therapies announced that it has received European CE mark approval for the Solace Intravesical System, and ISO 134852003 certification for the companys Framingham facility. The company is introducing its first product, an officebased therapy for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence at the International Continence Society Meeting in San Francisco on Friday, October 2, 2009.

“This certification and CE mark approval represent a significant achievement and major milestone for Solace,” said Kevin Connors, chief executive officer of Solace Therapeutics. “Successfully completing this process allows us to move forward with the clinical development of the Solace Intravesical System in Europe.

Solace is introducing its first product, a nonsurgical therapy for women with Stress Urinary Incontinence, to ICS members at their annual meeting on Friday. “Solace is targeting those patients that are dissatisfied with current therapies and choose to manage their urinary leakage with absorbent pads or diapers,” said Connors. “Solace has developed a new option for these patients.”

The Solace Balloon is a small lightweight device (about the size of a quarter) that floats within the urinary bladder. It acts as a “shock absorber” to reduce the temporary pressure changes in the bladder that cause urinary leakage. It is placed in the bladder with a soft tubelike catheter and inflated with air. The 5 minute procedure is performed in the physicians office without anesthesia or surgery. No lifestyle change is required after the procedure, and the procedure is reversible at any time.

The Solace Balloon for women with involuntary urine leakage is currently being evaluated in several centers throughout the U.S. in an FDA IDE approved clinical trial.

About Solace Therapeutics

Solace Therapeutics is an emerging medical device company focused on the development of nonsurgical office based treatments for common bladder disorders, such as stress urinary incontinence (SUI), overactive bladder (OAB), male voiding dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Solace is dedicated to improving the patients quality of life by eliminating side effects typically associated with current drug and surgical therapies. Solaces proprietary technology is designed to offer patients the following benefits

Officebased therapy that does not require anesthesia or surgery

No lifestyle change required, before or after treatment

Reversible at any time

Solaces patented technology platform is based on the fundamental fluid mechanics principles of reducing rapid pressure changes in fluid with airbased pressure attenuation. Solace is the pioneer of applying these principles to treat bladder dysfunction.

Source Solace Therapeutics, Inc

Pretreatment of a braindead, heartbeating kidney donor with dopamine reduced the need for dialysis for the kidney recipient in the first week after the transplantation, according to a study in the September 9 issue of JAMA.

“The majority of kidneys transplanted worldwide are retrieved from deceased heartbeating donors. As a consequence of brain death, the kidney graft is exposed to numerous injurious events prior to transplantation that predispose it to functional impairment after transplantation,” according to background information provided by the authors. While limiting organ injury through medical donor management may have an effect on the transplantation outcome, current recommendations are based on limited evidence from observational studies only.

Peter Schnuelle, M.D., Ph.D., of the University Medical Centre Mannheim, Germany, and colleagues assessed the effectiveness of donor pretreatment with dopamine by measuring the postoperative incidence of dialyses in kidney transplant recipients who received a kidney graft from a braindead donor. The trial included 264 deceased heartbeating donors and 487 subsequent kidney transplants performed at 60 European centers between March 2004 and August 2007, with final followup through December 2008. Donors were randomized to receive lowdose dopamine, which was infused for a median (midpoint) of 344 minutes.

The researchers found that donor dopamine treatment resulted in a significantly reduced use of dialysis after transplantation. Fewer recipients in the treatment group (24.7 percent) needed multiple dialyses before renal function recovered than did recipients in the nondopamine group (35.4 percent). “Accordingly, when both kidneys of each donor were transplanted, pretreatment of 10 donors prevented the need for multiple dialyses in 2 renal transplant recipients,” the researchers write.

The data also indicated that multiple dialyses increased the chances of graft failure in the longterm, whereas a single dialysis posttransplant did not.

“Dopamine resulted in significant but clinically meaningless increases in the donors systolic blood pressure and urine production before surgical recovery of the kidneys but had no influence on outcome,” the authors note.

“In conclusion, this study shows that pretreatment of the deceased heartbeating donor with lowdose dopamine reduces the need for dialysis in the recipient after kidney transplantation.”

JAMA. 2009;302[10]10671075.

A pilot study of a system for harvesting kidneys from nonheartbeating donors where attempts of resuscitation after a witnessed outofhospital cardiac arrest have failed (uncontrolled NHBDs) resulted in 21 successful kidney transplants a 10% increase in the transplantation rate over 17 months. Researchers writing in BioMed Centrals open access journal Critical Care have shown that retrieval from uncontrolled NHBDs may provide a valuable source of organs and could help counter the shortage of kidney grafts in France.

Dr MarieReine Losser, from the Paris Diderot University (Paris7), worked with a team of French researchers to trial the retrieval protocol in the Hôpital SaintLouis (Assistance PubliqueHôpitaux de Paris). She said, “Patients dying from sudden out of hospital refractory cardiac arrests may be eligible kidney donors. In the system we describe, the emergency services referred such patients to our institution under continuous ventilation and CPR. After death was certified, the kidneys were preserved while approval for donation was sought from the patients next of kin”.

Between February 1st 2007 and June 30th 2008, 122 patients were referred to the hospital in this way, and 49 were found to be eligible for organ retrieval. The families of 15 of these patients refused consent for organ donation, in 12 cases in the absence of or contrary to the donors previously expressed wishes. From the remaining patients, 31 kidneys were transplanted and at least 27 of these transplants were ultimately successful.

According to Losser, the procedure raised ethical controversies in France, “The question emerged about a conflict of interest between patient care and potential organ procurement. In fact, in this cohort, resuscitation duration was always longer than recommended. There is, however, a clear need for better acceptance of organ donation within the population, something that could be achieved by sustained nationwide information campaigns”.

Notes
Kidney retrieval after sudden out of hospital refractory cardiac arrest a cohort of uncontrolled non heart beating donors. Fabienne Fieux, MarieReine Losser, Eric Bourgeois, Francine Bonnet, Olivier Marie, Francois Gaudez, Imad Abboud, JeanLuc Donay, France Roussin, Francois Mourey, Frederic Adnet and Laurent Jacob. Critical Care (in press). ccforum.com/

Source
Graeme Baldwin

The most severely ill advanced renal cell cancer patients in England & Wales (numbering around 390 people) have been dealt a blow by the decision of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to reject an appeal by Wyeth against NICEs earlier decision not to recommend Torisel (temsirolimus) for use by the NHS in England & Wales.

As the only treatment evaluated in NICEs recent Health Technology Appraisal of kidney cancer drugs to have demonstrated a significant extension to life in this severely ill group of patients1, the rejection of Torisel will be seen as further limiting the options available to patients fighting advanced kidney cancer.

“The rejection of this appeal and the failure to recommend Torisel the only treatment proven to extend life in these patients is a devastating blow to patients and their families” said Dr Vignesh Rajah, Medical Director, Wyeth. “It further accentuates the disparity in cancer care between the UK and other advanced countries, where Torisel and other innovative renal cell cancer drugs are routinely used. NICEs rejection also conflicts with professional treatment guidelines on renal cell cancer published earlier this year, recommending Torisel as first line treatment for poor prognosis patients2,3.”

Torisel is licensed to treat a very small group of advanced renal cell cancer patients with the poorest prognosis. Given the rarity of this severe form of renal cancer, it is termed an “ultraorphan” condition. NICE has previously acknowledged that appraising drugs for very rare conditions, such as this, “presents special difficulties”.4

Wyeth believes that NICE failed to fully take into account both the very small number of patients eligible for treatment with Torisel and their degree of clinical need. Consequently, Wyeth believes that this has resulted in a decision that discriminates against the most seriously ill renal cell cancer patients.

NICE has already taken an important step forward in recommending an innovative lifeextending treatment for some other groups of renal cancer patients. Nevertheless, the hardest hit patients those with advanced renal cell cancer with the poorest prognosis have been left without access to the only drug proven to extend their lives.

Wyeth appealed against the proposed Final Appraisal Determination with respect to the fact that NICE had failed to act fairly and in accordance with its published procedures and with regard to the fact that it had prepared a Final Appraisal Determination which was perverse in the light of evidence submitted.

Dr Rajah commented “Wyeth is very disappointed by the rejection of this appeal as we believe the Appraisal Committee failed to correctly apply the Institutes own guidance (known as the End of Life Supplementary Advice) for appraising lifeextending, endoflife treatments. This requires due consideration to be given to the impact of giving greater weight to the quality of life of patients in the later stage of terminal diseases in order to fully capture the treatment benefits of life extending drugs, such as Torisel.

He continued “In addition, we consider that the Appraisal Committee failed to adequately use its discretion in applying directions from the Secretary of State for Health that allow particular features of a condition and the patient population it affects to be taken into account when determining the cost effectiveness of a treatment.”

Following the rejection of its appeal, Wyeth is considering its position and the available options to secure patient access to Torisel.

About Torisel

Torisel (temsirolimus) is the first and only renal cell cancer therapy proven to extend overall survival in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients with poor prognosis compared with interferonalpha.1 An openlabel, randomised, phase 3 study compared Torisel alone, a combination of Torisel plus interferonalpha, and interferonalpha alone as firstline therapy in 626 patients with advanced RCC who had at least three of six prognostic risk factors.1

In this study, Torisel alone significantly increased median overall survival by 49 % compared with interferonalpha alone (10.9 months for Torisel vs. 7.3 months for interferonalpha, P=0.0078).1Torisel was also associated with statistically significant improvement over interferonalpha in the secondary end point of progressionfree survival (PFS), when the disease does not get worse (3.8 months of PFS vs. 1.9 months of PFS, P

The most severely ill advanced renal cell cancer patients in England & Wales (numbering around 390 people) have been dealt a blow by the decision of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to reject an appeal by Wyeth against NICEs earlier decision not to recommend Torisel (temsirolimus) for use by the NHS in England & Wales.

As the only treatment evaluated in NICEs recent Health Technology Appraisal of kidney cancer drugs to have demonstrated a significant extension to life in this severely ill group of patients1, the rejection of Torisel will be seen as further limiting the options available to patients fighting advanced kidney cancer.

“The rejection of this appeal and the failure to recommend Torisel the only treatment proven to extend life in these patients is a devastating blow to patients and their families” said Dr Vignesh Rajah, Medical Director, Wyeth. “It further accentuates the disparity in cancer care between the UK and other advanced countries, where Torisel and other innovative renal cell cancer drugs are routinely used. NICEs rejection also conflicts with professional treatment guidelines on renal cell cancer published earlier this year, recommending Torisel as first line treatment for poor prognosis patients2,3.”

Torisel is licensed to treat a very small group of advanced renal cell cancer patients with the poorest prognosis. Given the rarity of this severe form of renal cancer, it is termed an “ultraorphan” condition. NICE has previously acknowledged that appraising drugs for very rare conditions, such as this, “presents special difficulties”.4

Wyeth believes that NICE failed to fully take into account both the very small number of patients eligible for treatment with Torisel and their degree of clinical need. Consequently, Wyeth believes that this has resulted in a decision that discriminates against the most seriously ill renal cell cancer patients.

NICE has already taken an important step forward in recommending an innovative lifeextending treatment for some other groups of renal cancer patients. Nevertheless, the hardest hit patients those with advanced renal cell cancer with the poorest prognosis have been left without access to the only drug proven to extend their lives.

Wyeth appealed against the proposed Final Appraisal Determination with respect to the fact that NICE had failed to act fairly and in accordance with its published procedures and with regard to the fact that it had prepared a Final Appraisal Determination which was perverse in the light of evidence submitted.

Dr Rajah commented “Wyeth is very disappointed by the rejection of this appeal as we believe the Appraisal Committee failed to correctly apply the Institutes own guidance (known as the End of Life Supplementary Advice) for appraising lifeextending, endoflife treatments. This requires due consideration to be given to the impact of giving greater weight to the quality of life of patients in the later stage of terminal diseases in order to fully capture the treatment benefits of life extending drugs, such as Torisel.

He continued “In addition, we consider that the Appraisal Committee failed to adequately use its discretion in applying directions from the Secretary of State for Health that allow particular features of a condition and the patient population it affects to be taken into account when determining the cost effectiveness of a treatment.”

Following the rejection of its appeal, Wyeth is considering its position and the available options to secure patient access to Torisel.

About Torisel

Torisel (temsirolimus) is the first and only renal cell cancer therapy proven to extend overall survival in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients with poor prognosis compared with interferonalpha.1 An openlabel, randomised, phase 3 study compared Torisel alone, a combination of Torisel plus interferonalpha, and interferonalpha alone as firstline therapy in 626 patients with advanced RCC who had at least three of six prognostic risk factors.1

In this study, Torisel alone significantly increased median overall survival by 49 % compared with interferonalpha alone (10.9 months for Torisel vs. 7.3 months for interferonalpha, P=0.0078).1Torisel was also associated with statistically significant improvement over interferonalpha in the secondary end point of progressionfree survival (PFS), when the disease does not get worse (3.8 months of PFS vs. 1.9 months of PFS, P

In most transplant centers, the kidneys of very young deceased donors are transplanted together into one patient. According to a study appearing in an upcoming issue of the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (CJASN), a single kidney from a very young deceased donor maintains the health of an adult with kidney failure.

Determining the minimum donor age or body weight for splitting kidneys for transplant is controversial. Transplanting both pediatric kidneys into an adult theoretically provides better kidney function, and surgeons do not usually divide kidneys when the donor is under five years of age. However, giving each of two patients in need one organ from the same donor could increase kidney transplants in the United States approximately 80,000 individuals are waiting for kidney transplants, and 4,000 die each year before receiving transplants. Rubin Zhang, MD (Tulane Abdominal Transplant Institute), and his colleagues compared the longterm health of adult patients after they were transplanted with either single pediatric kidneys from donors less than five years of age or single kidneys from donors more than five but less than 10 years of age.

The researchers study included all 79 adults who were transplanted at the Tulane Abdominal Transplant Institute with single pediatric kidneys from deceased donors aged 10 years or less between January 1996 and June 2007. Physicians transplanted a single pediatric kidney if it was healthy enough for splitting and the recipient consented. Half of the adults received single pediatric kidneys from donors less than five years of age. The other half received single kidneys from donors aged five to 10 years.

While more patients in the group that received a kidney from the youngest donors (73%) needed ureteral stents (tubes inserted to help drain urine from the kidney) than patients in the other group (38%), complications that required additional surgery were similar in the two groups. Patients in the two groups experienced similar rates of kidney rejection and delayed kidney function. In both groups, kidney function improved dramatically in the first year after transplant, and it continued to improve into the third year. Furthermore, patients in the two groups lived a similar length of time. The youngest donor in the study was a ninemonth old female; both of her donated kidneys remain healthy more than six years posttransplantation into two different recipients.

While other studies have reported more complications when single kidneys from very young donors are transplanted into adults, this study found that the practice is safe and effective. “Single pediatric kidney transplants from donors less than five years can be utilized with acceptable complications and good longterm outcomes” the authors concluded.

The authors report no financial disclosures. Study coauthors include Anil Paramesh, MD, Sandy Florman, MD, C. Lillian Yau, PhD, Saravanan Balamuthusamy, MD, N. Kevin Krane, MD, and Douglas Slakey, MD (Tuland Abdominal Transplant Institute).

The article, entitled “LongTerm Outcome of Adults Who Undergo Transplantation with Single Pediatric Kidneys How Young Is too Young?” appeared online at cjasn.asnjournals.org/ on August 20, 2009, doi 10.2215/CJN.04610908.

Source
Shari Leventhal

UroToday.com Prostate cancer (CaP) has a predilection to metastasize to bone, resulting in skeletalrelated events (SREs). The cancer cells interact with osteoclasts (bone resorption), and osteoblasts (bone formation) to create a vicious cycle of tumor growth and bone destruction.

The receptor activator of NFпЃ«B ligand (RANKL) is secreted by osteoblasts in response to tumor cells and is an essential mediator of osteoclast formation, function and survival. Binding of RANKL to its receptor RANK on osteoclasts promotes increased osteoclast formation and bone resorption. Inhibition of RANKL has been shown as beneficial in animal models of bone metastasis.

In the July issue of the Journal of Urology, Dr. Karim Fizazi and colleagues report results of a Phase II trial using denosumab, a monoclonal antibody against RANKL in patients with bone metastasis. The study was a multicenter, phase II, randomized open label, active controlled study conducted at 26 centers in Europe and North America from 2004 to 2008. It compared 2 different doses of subcutaneous denosumab and IV bisphosphonates. Participants had bone metastasis from CaP, other solid tumors except lung cancer, or multiple myeloma.

Urine Ntelopeptide (uNTx), a marker of bone turnover is known to correlate with clinical prognosis and was measured. uNTx >50nM BCE/MM creatinine represents excess bone resorption and is associated with increased risk of SREs, cancer progression and death. Denosumab was delivered as 180mg sc every 4 weeks or every 12 weeks and IV bisphosphonates (BP) given every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with uNTx

BioTrends Research Group, Inc. released TreatmentTrends(R) US Nephrology, a syndicated report analyzing treatment practices, attitudes and perceptions based on online survey results from over 200 US Nephrologists. The survey was fielded in late May and focuses on trends in treatment patterns for renal anemia, secondary hyperparathyroidism and hyperphosphatemia.

Nephrologists are extremely interested in AMAGs new IV iron product, Feraheme, which was approved by the FDA on June 30, 2009. Nephrologists identified two areas in particular where both American Regent / Fresenius Venofer and Watsons Ferrlecit seem to fall short, where AMAG may have an advantage. According to Nephrologists, the current products underperform in the CKDND setting on quick administration and minimal staff time. These administration attributes are areas where Nephrologists perceive Feraheme to have a competitive advantage. The uptake of Feraheme and its impact on the anemia market will be further explored in LaunchTrends(TM) Feraheme, a threewave report series from BioTrends tracking trial, adoption and usage at one month, three months, and six months post launch.

The longer term changes in the anemia market are overshadowed by the pending dialysis bundled payment system scheduled to be implemented in 2011. According to a recent report published by BioTrends on anticipated impact of the dialysis bundle, Medical Directors foresee the increased use of IV iron to spare the use of ESAs (such as Amgens Epogen) as well as IV iron brand selection being heavily influenced by price. Although the bundled payment only impacts the dialysis market, reimbursement has a high degree of influence on brand choice in the chronic kidney disease non dialysis (CKDND) market as well. This adds importance to Nephrologists perception that CentocorOrtho Biotechs Procrit has a competitive advantage over Amgens Aranesp on “minimal hassles with prior authorizations” and “adequate reimbursement”.

In the phosphate binder market, Genzymes sevelamer compounds are being used to treat almost half of the dialysis patients. At one year post launch, virtually all Nephrologists have started to use Renvela, the new formulation. FMCs PhosLo is under mounting pressure from generic versions of the product and Nephrologists are showing little resistance 80% either allow substitution or prescribe the generic version outright. Shires Fosrenol is the only brand for which Nephrologists project significant increases in market share. Despite significantly higher performance ratings on the most important attribute (Efficacy), Fosrenol is still typically reserved for second or third line therapy or as an additive product for patients not well controlled on their current regimen. According to the survey, the need for new phosphate binders and PTH modifiers is relatively high compared to the need for new ESA and IV iron therapies. Particularly in the phosphate binder market, there are a number of important product attributes where current products fall short, making room for potential new product entrants.

In the PTH modifier market, the Vitamin D products continue to try to differentiate. While Abbotts Zemplar performs significantly better than Genzymes Hectorol on almost every product attribute, Nephrologists perceive room for improvement for both products in a number of areas including hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, and impact on calcification. Although these are areas where Amgens Sensipar has a competitive advantage, Sensipars reimbursement and tolerability profile, as well as the fact that Nephrologists continue to reserve it for patients with extremely elevated PTH, seems to hold it back from being used in more than onethird of hemodialysis patients. In the oral Vitamin D market, Q209 marked the first quarter where Abbotts Zemplar capsules saw a year over year decrease in market share. Hectorol PO also declined year over year, but together these newer analogues still account for roughly half of the CKD patient share while calcitriol remains the market share leader.

The next wave of TreatmentTrends(R) US Nephrology will field in late August in tandem with surveys directed at two ancillary renal care audiences, Anemia Managers and Renal Dietitians.

About BioTrends Research Group, Inc.

BioTrends Research Group, Inc. provides syndicated and custom market research to pharmaceutical manufacturers competing in clinically evolving, specialty pharmaceutical markets.

All company, brand, or product names contained in this document may be trademarks of their respective holders.

UroToday.com In this paper, we investigated 809 prostate cancer patients subjected to >10 cores at initial or repeat prostate biopsy from two prospective, multicenter studies from Europe and North America It has been demonstrated that the urinary marker Prostate CAncer gene 3 (PCA3) represents a novel prostate cancer (PCa) detection marker capable of increasing accuracy of multivariable biopsy nomograms.[1] The paper reports the first PCA3based nomograms which accurately identify individuals at risk of harboring PCa (AUC=0.73). If a PCA3 score in combination with established risk factors is available, this novel tool assists clinicians in deciding whether further prostatic evaluation is necessary.

Despite these promising results it must be emphasized that novel markers such as PCA3 do not replace established risk factors such as PSA and its subforms, digital rectal findings and/or prostate volume. [2] [3] However, this combination resulted in significant improvements in accuracy (between 2% to 5%) of biopsy outcome prediction. This increment of +5% related to one single marker (PCA3) is remarkable since Shariat et al. recently added 7 novel diagnostic markers to a multivariable model predicting biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy which were related to a gain in accuracy by “only” +15% (AUC=0.72 to AUC=0.87). [4]

Although this study involves the largest PCA 3 biopsyverified patient cohort to date, it needs to be acknowledged that our findings are still based on a relatively small sample size. Specifically, PCA3 score cutoff analyses need further investigation in different biopsy settings (e.g. initial vs. repeat) [5, 6] or in further sub stratification (e.g. PSA cutoffs 02.5 ng/ml vs. 2.64 ng/ml) in larger scale studies, respectively. [7] In fact, it may be argued that, similar to PSA [8], a PCA3 score is better displayed as a continuously increasing risk according to increasing scores and that cutoff values may not be indicated. For example, as suggested by the current paper, the PCA3 score used as a continuous risk variable demonstrated the highest univariable accuracy (AUC=0.68) outperforming other previously published PCA3 cutoffs (AUC=0.62 0.63) or PSA (AUC=0.53). However, this result could not be confirmed in multivariable analysis.

In conclusion, our results are clearly encouraging demonstrating that PCA3 is one of the novel markers alleviating PSAs dilemma of low specificity. But larger scale studies are also clearly warranted to replicate our findings and to externally validate the first PCA3 nomogram.

References

1. Chun FK, de la Taille A, van Poppel H, Marberger M, Stenzl A, Mulders PF, Huland H, Abbou CC, Stillebroer AB, van Gils MP et al Prostate Cancer Gene 3 (PCA3) Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Biopsy Nomogram. Eur Urol 2009.
2. Kattan MW Judging new markers by their ability to improve predictive accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003, 95(9)634635.
3. Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Briganti A, Gallina A, Kattan MW, Montorsi F, Huland H, Graefen M Prostate cancer nomograms an update. Eur Urol 2006, 50(5)914926; discussion 926.
4. Shariat SF, Karam JA, Walz J, Roehrborn CG, Montorsi F, Margulis V, Saad F, Slawin KM, Karakiewicz PI Improved prediction of disease relapse after radical prostatectomy through a panel of preoperative bloodbased biomarkers. Clin Cancer Res 2008, 14(12)37853791.
5. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Porter C, Scattoni V, Gallina A, Walz J, Haese A, Steuber T et al Development and external validation of an extended 10core biopsy nomogram. Eur Urol 2007, 52(2)436444.
6. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, Porter C, Montorsi F, Haese A, Scattoni V, Borden L, Steuber T, Salonia A et al Development and external validation of an extended repeat biopsy nomogram. J Urol 2007, 177(2)510515.
7. Briganti A Editorial Comment on Prostate Cancer Gene 3 (PCA3) Development and Internal Validation of a Novel Biopsy Nomogram. Eur Urol 2009.
8. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Feng Z, Parnes HL, Coltman CA, Jr. Assessing prostate cancer risk results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006, 98(8)529534.

Written by Felix K. Chun, MD1, et al. as part of Beyond the Abstract on UroToday.com

1 Department of Urology, University Hospital HamburgEppendorf, Hamburg

UroToday the only urology website with original content written by global urology key opinion leaders actively engaged in clinical practice. To access the latest urology news releases from UroToday, go tourotoday.com

The New York Daily News profiled Paul Klotman, chair of the Samuel F. Bronfman Department of Medicine at Mount Sinai, who is “one of the worlds leading experts on the kidney diseases associated with HIV.” In the article, Klotman discussed the clinical details of HIVassociated nephropathy (HIVAN), including treatment, causes and symptoms. According to the Daily News, doctors estimate that two million to four million people of African heritage have HIVAN, including between 4 percent and 12 percent of blacks with HIV in the U.S. The article continues, “In recent years, doctors have made tremendous advances in their understanding of both HIV and its associated kidney disease.” Klotman said, “In thinking about a cure, we know now that we have to clean out the brain and the kidney. Those are things we have to know if we can ever achieve a cure for AIDS” (Charles, 7/22).

This information was reprinted from dailyreports.kff.org with kind permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily U.S. HIV/AIDS Report, search the archives and sign up for email delivery at dailyreports.kff.org.

© Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.