Prostate cancer screening is an attempt to find unsuspected cancers. Initial screens may lead to more invasive follow-up tests such as a biopsy. Options include the digital rectal exam (DRE) and the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test. Such screening is controversial and, in some people, may lead to unnecessary disruption and possibly harmful consequences. Routine screening with either a DRE or PSA is not supported by the evidence as there is no mortality benefit from screening.

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against the PSA test for prostate cancer screening in healthy men regardless of age. They concluded that the potential benefit of testing does not outweigh the expected harms. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shared that conclusion. The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American College of Physicians discourages screening for those who are expected to live less than ten to fifteen years, while in those with a greater life expectancy a decision should be made by the person in question based on the potential risks and benefits. In general, they concluded, "it is uncertain whether the benefits associated with PSA testing for prostate cancer screening are worth the harms associated with screening and subsequent unnecessary treatment." American Urological Association (AUA 2013) guidelines call for weighing the benefits of preventing prostate cancer mortality in 1 man for every 1,000 men screened over a ten-year period against the known harms associated with diagnostic tests and treatment. The AUA recommends screening decisions in those 55 to 69 be based on shared decision making, and that if screening is performed it should occur no more often than every two years.

In those who are being regularly screened, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor (finasteride and dutasteride) reduce the overall risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer; however, there is insufficient data to determine if they have an effect on the risk of death and may increase the chance of more serious cases.

HGPIN in isolation does not require treatment. In prostate biopsies it is not predictive of prostate cancer in one year if the prostate was well-sampled, i.e. if there were 8 or more cores.

The exact timing of repeat biopsies remains an area of controversy, as the time required for, and probability of HGPIN transformations to prostate cancer are not well understood.

HGPIN is diagnosed from tissue by a pathologist, which may come from:

- a needle biopsy taken via the rectum and,

- surgical removal of prostate tissue:

- transurethral resection of the prostate - removal of extra prostate tissue to improve urination (a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia),

- radical prostatectomy - complete removal of prostate and seminal vesicles (a treatment for prostate cancer).

Blood tests for prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination, ultrasound scanning of the prostate via the rectum, fine needle aspiration or medical imaging studies (such as magnetic resonance imaging) are "not" useful for diagnosing HGPIN.

The clinical diagnosis of BPH is based on a history of LUTS (lower urinary tract symptoms), a digital rectal exam, and exclusion of other causes of similar signs and symptoms. The degree of LUTS does not necessarily correspond to the size of the prostate. An enlarged prostate gland on rectal examination that is symmetric and smooth supports a diagnosis of BPH. However, if the prostate gland feels asymmetrical, firm, or nodular, this raises concern for prostate cancer.

Urinalysis is typically performed when LUTS are present and BPH is suspected to evaluate for signs of a urinary tract infection, glucose in the urine (suggestive of diabetes), or protein in the urine (suggestive of kidney disease). Bloodwork including kidney function tests and prostate specific antigen (PSA) are often ordered to evaluate for kidney damage and prostate cancer, respectively. However, checking blood PSA levels for prostate cancer screening is controversial and not necessarily indicated in every evaluation for BPH. Benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer are both capable of increasing blood PSA levels and PSA elevation is unable to differentiate these two conditions well. If PSA levels are checked and are high, then further investigation is warranted. Measures including PSA density, free PSA, rectal examination, and transrectal ultrasonography may be helpful in determining whether a PSA increase is due to BPH or prostate cancer. Ultrasound examination of the testes, prostate, and kidneys is often performed, again to rule out cancer and hydronephrosis.

Validated questionnaires such as the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA-SI), the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS), and more recently the UWIN score (urgency, weak stream, incomplete emptying, and nocturia) are useful aids to making the diagnosis of BPH and quantifying the severity of symptoms.

Voiding position when urinating may influence urodynamic parameters (urinary flow rate, voiding time, and post-void residual volume). A meta-analysis found no differences between the standing and sitting positions for healthy males, but that, for elderly males with lower urinary tract symptoms, voiding in the sitting position:

- the post void residual volume was decreased

- the maximum urinary flow was increased, comparable with pharmacological intervention

- the voiding time was decreased

This urodynamic profile is associated with a lower risk of urologic complications, such as cystitis and bladder stones.

PUNLMPs are treated like non-invasive low grade papillary urothelial carcinomas, excision and regular follow-up cystoscopies.

There is a rare occurrence of a pelvic recurrence of a low-grade superficial TCC after cystectomy. Delayed presentation with recurrent low-grade urothelial carcinoma is an unusual entity and potential mechanism of traumatic implantation should be considered. Characteristically low-grade tumors are resistant to systemic chemotherapy and curative-intent surgical resection of the tumor should be considered.

PUNLMPs are exophytic lesions that appear friable to the naked eye and when imaged during cystoscopy.

They are definitively diagnosed after removal by microscopic examination by pathologists.

Histologically, they have a papillary architecture with slender fibrovascular cores and rare basal mitoses. The papillae rarely fuse and uncommonly branch. Cytologically, they have uniform nuclear enlargement.

They cannot be reliably differentiated from low grade papillary urothelial carcinomas using cytology, and their diagnosis (vis-a-vis low grade papillary urothelial carcinoma) has a poor inter-rater reliability.

Pathologic grading and staging tumors are:

graded by the degree of cellular atypia (G1->G3), and

staged:

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms can come to clinical attention in a variety of different ways. The most common symptoms include abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting. The most common signs patients have when they come to medical attention include jaundice (a yellowing of the skin and eyes caused by obstruction of the bile duct), weight loss, and acute pancreatitis. These signs and symptoms are not specific for an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, making it more difficult to establish a diagnosis. Doctors will therefore often order additional tests.

Once a doctor has reason to believe that a patient may have an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, he or she can confirm that suspicion using one of a number of imaging techniques. These include computerized tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). These tests will reveal dilatation of the pancreatic duct or one of the branches of the pancreatic duct. In some cases a fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy can be obtained to confirm the diagnosis. Fine needle aspiration biopsy can be performed through an endoscope at the time of endoscopic ultrasound, or it can be performed through the skin using a needle guided by ultrasound or CT scanning.

IPMN forms cysts (small cavities or spaces) in the pancreas. These cysts are visible in CT scans (X-ray computed tomography). However, many pancreatic cysts are benign (see Pancreatic disease).

A growing number of patients are now being diagnosed before they develop symptoms (asymptomatic patients). In these cases, the lesion in the pancreas is discovered accidentally (by chance) when the patient is being scanned (i.e. undergoing an ultrasound, CT or MRI scan) for another reason. Up to 6% of patients undergoing pancreatic resection did so for treatment of incidental IPMNs.

In 2011, scientists at Johns Hopkins reported that they have developed a gene-based test that can be used to distinguish harmless from precancerous pancreatic cysts. The test may eventually help patients with harmless cysts avoid needless surgery. Bert Vogelstein and his colleagues discovered that almost all of the precancerous cysts (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms) of the pancreas have mutations in the KRAS and/or the GNAS gene. The researchers then tested a total of 132 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms for mutations in KRAS and GNAS. Nearly all (127) had mutations in GNAS, KRAS or both. Next, the investigators tested harmless cysts such as serous cystadenomas, and the harmless cysts did not have GNAS or KRAS mutations. Larger numbers of patients must be studied before the gene-based test can be widely offered.

Serous cystic neoplasms can come to clinical attention in a variety of ways. The most common symptoms are very non-specific and include abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting. In contrast to many of the other tumors of the pancreas, patients rarely develop jaundice (a yellowing of the skin and eyes caused by obstruction of the bile duct), or weight loss. These signs and symptoms are not specific for a serous cystic neoplasm, making it more difficult to establish a diagnosis. Doctors will therefore often order additional tests.

Once a doctor has reason to believe that a patient may have serous cystic neoplasm, he or she can confirm that suspicion using one of a number of imaging techniques. These include computerized tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). These tests will reveal a cystic mass within the pancreas. The cysts do not communicate with the larger pancreatic ducts. In some cases a fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy can be obtained to confirm the diagnosis. Fine needle aspiration biopsy can be performed through an endoscope at the time of endoscopic ultrasound, or it can be performed through the skin using a needle guided by ultrasound or CT scanning.

A growing number of patients are now being diagnosed before they develop symptoms (asymptomatic patients). In these cases, the lesion in the pancreas is discovered accidentally (by chance) when the patient is being scanned (x-rayed) for another reason.

ASAP is considered an indication for re-biopsy; in one survey of urologists 98% of respondents considered it a sufficient reason to re-biopsy.

A CT scan can detect bone metastases before becoming symptomatic in patients diagnosed with tumors with risk of spread to the bones. Even sclerotic bone metastases are generally less radiodense than enostoses, and it has been suggested that bone metastasis should be the favored diagnosis between the two for bone lesions lower than a cutoff of 1060 Hounsfield units (HU).

The treatment of choice for main-duct IPMNs is resection due to approximately 50% chance of malignancy. Side-branch IPMNs are occasionally monitored with regular CT or MRIs, but most are eventually resected, with a 30% rate of malignancy in these resected tumors. Survival 5 years after resection of an IPMN without malignancy is approximately 80%, 85% with malignancy but no lymph node spread and 0% with malignancy spreading to lymph nodes. Surgery can include the removal of the head of the pancreas (a pancreaticoduodenectomy), removal of the body and tail of the pancreas (a distal pancreatectomy), or rarely removal of the entire pancreas (a total pancreatectomy). In selected cases the surgery can be performed using minimally invasive techniques such as laparoscopy or robotic surgery. A study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result Registry (SEER) data suggested that increased lymph node counts harvested during the surgery were associated with better survival in invasive IPMN patients.

On a subsequent biopsy, given the diagnosis of ASAP, the chance of finding prostate adenocarcinoma is approximately 40%; this is higher than if there is high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN).

These lesions rarely require surgery unless they are symptomatic or the diagnosis is in question. Since these lesions do not have malignant potential, long-term observation is unnecessary. Surgery can include the removal of the head of the pancreas (a pancreaticoduodenectomy), removal of the body and tail of the pancreas (a distal pancreatectomy), or rarely removal of the entire pancreas (a total pancreatectomy). In selected cases the surgery can be performed using minimally invasive techniques such as laparoscopy.

Immunohistochemistry is performed as additional test. The strong positive expression of cytokeratin 19 was showed in primary SCTC, and negative in metastatic SCTC.

Prostatic stromal tumour of uncertain malignant potential, abbreviated PSTUMP, is a rare tumour of the prostate gland stroma that may behave benign or like cancer, i.e. "malignant".

It can be abbreviated STUMP; an abbreviation used for a uterine lesion of uncertain malignant potential.

It is also known as prostatic stromal proliferation of uncertain malignant potential (abbreviated PSPUMP).

There are no specific radiological tests for SCTC verification. However these tests might be useful for identification of tumor borders and in planning of surgery.

The goals of the treatment for bone metastases include pain control, prevention and treatment of fractures, maintenance of patient function, and local tumor control. Treatment options are determined by multiple factors, including performance status, life expectancy, impact on quality of life, and overall status of clinical disease.

Pain management

The World Health Organization's pain ladder was designed for the management of cancer-associated pain, and mainly involves various strength of opioids. Mild pain or breakthrough pain may be treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Other treatments include bisphosphonates, corticosteroids, radiotherapy, and radionucleotides.

Percutaneous osteoplasty involves the use of bone cement to reduce pain and improve mobility. In palliative therapy, the main options are external radiation and radiopharmaceuticals. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) has CE approval for palliative care for bone metastasis, though treatments are still in investigatory phases as more information is needed to study effectiveness in order to obtain full approval in countries such as the USA.

Thermal ablation techniques are increasingly being used in the palliative treatment of painful metastatic bone disease. Although the majority of patients experience complete or partial relief of pain following external radiation therapy, the effect is not immediate and has been shown in some studies to be transient in more than half of patients. For patients who are not eligible or do not respond to traditional therapies ( i.e. radiation therapy, chemotherapy, palliative surgery, bisphosphonates or analgesic medications), thermal ablation techniques have been explored as alternatives for pain reduction. Several multi-center clinical trials studying the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of moderate to severe pain in patients with metastatic bone disease have shown significant decreases in patient reported pain after treatment. These studies are limited, however, to patients with one or two metastatic sites; pain from multiple tumors can be difficult to localize for directed therapy. More recently, cryoablation has also been explored as a potentially effective alternative as the area of destruction created by this technique can be monitored more effectively by CT than radiofrequency ablation, a potential advantage when treating tumors adjacent to critical structures.

Monthly injections of radium-223 chloride (as Xofigo, formerly called Alpharadin) have

been approved by the FDA in May 2013 for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) with bone metastases.

A Cochrane review of calcitonin for the treatment of metastatic bone pain indicated no benefit in reduction of bone pain, complications, or quality of life.

Among women worldwide, breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer death. Breast self-examination (BSE) is an easy but unreliable method for finding possible breast cancer. Factors that appear to be implicated in decreasing the risk of, early diagnosis of. or recurrence of breast cancer are regular breast examinations by health care professionals, regular mammograms, self-examination of breasts, healthy diet, and exercise to decrease excess body fat.

A gonadal tissue neoplasm is a tumor having any histology characteristic of cells or tissues giving rise to the gonads. These tissues arise from the sex cord and stromal cells. The tumor may be derived from these tissues, or produce them.

Although the tumor is composed of gonadal tissue, it is not necessarily located in an ovary or testicle.

A gonadal tissue neoplasm should not be confused with a urogenital neoplasm, though the two topics are often studied together. The embryology of the gonads is only indirectly related to the embryology of the external genitals and urinary system.

Several case reports of interstitial pneumonitis (which can progress to pulmonary fibrosis) in association with bicalutamide treatment have been published in the medical literature. Interstitial pneumonitis with bicalutamide is said to be an extremely rare event, and the risk is far less relative to that seen with nilutamide (which has an incidence rate of 0.5–2% of patients). In a very large cohort of prostate cancer patients, the incidence of interstitial pneumonitis with was 0.77% for nilutamide but only 0.04% (4 per 10,000) for flutamide and 0.01% (1 per 10,000) for bicalutamide. An assessment done prior to the publication of the aforementioned study estimated the rates of pulmonary toxicity with flutamide, bicalutamide, and nilutamide as 1 case, 5 cases, and 303 cases per million, respectively. In addition to interstitial pneumonitis, a single case report of eosinophilic lung disease in association with six months of 200 mg/day bicalutamide treatment exists. Side effects associated with the rare potential pulmonary adverse reactions of bicalutamide may include dyspnea (difficult breathing or shortness of breath), cough, and pharyngitis (inflammation of the pharynx, resulting in sore throat).

Bicalutamide may cause liver changes rarely, such as elevated transaminases and jaundice. In the study of 4,052 prostate cancer patients who received 150 mg/day bicalutamide as a monotherapy, the incidence of abnormal liver function tests was 3.4% for bicalutamide and 1.9% for standard care (a 1.5% difference potentially attributable to bicalutamide) at 3-year median follow-up. For comparison, the incidences of abnormal liver function tests are 42 to 62% for flutamide, 2 to 3% for nilutamide, and (dose-dependently) between 9.6% and 28.2% for , whereas there appears to be no risk with enzalutamide. In the trial, bicalutamide-induced liver changes were usually transient and rarely severe. The drug was discontinued due to liver changes (manifested as hepatitis or marked increases in liver enzymes) in approximately 0.3% to 1% of patients treated with it for prostate cancer in clinical trials.

The risk of liver changes with bicalutamide is considered to be small but significant, and monitoring of liver function is recommended. Elevation of transaminases above twice the normal range or jaundice may be an indication that bicalutamide should be discontinued. Liver changes with bicalutamide usually occur within the first 3 or 4 months of treatment, and it is recommended that liver function be monitored regularly for the first 4 months of treatment and periodically thereafter. Symptoms that may indicate liver dysfunction include nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, fatigue, anorexia, "flu-like" symptoms, dark urine, and jaundice.

Out of millions of patient exposures, a total of five cases of bicalutamide-associated hepatotoxicity or liver failure, two of which were fatal, have been reported in the medical literature as of 2016. One of these cases occurred after only two doses of bicalutamide, and has been regarded as much more likely to have been caused by prolonged prior exposure of the patient to flutamide and . In the five reported cases of bicalutamide-associated hepatotoxicity, the dosages of the drug were 50 mg/day (three), 100 mg/day (one), and 150 mg/day (one). Relative to flutamide (which has an estimated incidence rate of 0.03% or 3 per 10,000), hepatotoxicity is far rarer with bicalutamide and nilutamide, and bicalutamide is regarded as having the lowest risk of the three drugs. For comparison, by 1996, 46 cases of severe cholestatic hepatitis associated with flutamide had been reported, with 20 of the cases resulting in death. Moreover, a 2002 review reported that there were 18 reports of hepatotoxicity associated with in the medical literature, with 6 of the reported cases resulting in death, and the review also cited a report of an additional 96 instances of hepatotoxicity that were attributed to , 33 of which resulted in death.

The clinical studies that have found elevated liver enzymes and the case reports of hepatotoxicity with bicalutamide have all specifically pertained to men of advanced age with prostate cancer. It is notable that older age, for a variety of reasons, appears to be an important risk factor for drug-induced hepatotoxicity. As such, the risk of liver changes with bicalutamide may be less in younger patients, for instance young hirsute women and transgender women. However, it has been reported on the basis of very limited evidence that this may not be the case with flutamide.

From a theoretical standpoint (on the basis of structure–activity relationships), it has been suggested that flutamide, bicalutamide, and nilutamide, to varying extents, all have the potential to cause liver toxicity. However, in contrast to flutamide, hydroxyflutamide, and nilutamide, bicalutamide exhibits much less or no mitochondrial toxicity and inhibition of enzymes in the electron transport chain such as respiratory complex I (), and this may be the reason for its much lower risk of hepatotoxicity in comparison. The activity difference may be related to the fact that flutamide, hydroxyflutamide, and nilutamide all possess a nitroaromatic group, whereas in bicalutamide, a cyano group is present in place of this nitro group, potentially reducing toxicity.

These may be caused among others by trauma, secretory stasis/milk engorgement, hormonal stimulation, infections or autoimmune reactions.

Repeated occurrence unrelated to lactation requires endocrinological examination.

- bacterial mastitis

- mastitis from milk engorgement or secretory stasis

- mastitis or mumps

- chronic subareolar abscess

- tuberculosis of the breast

- syphilis of the breast

- retromammary abscess

- actinomycosis of the breast

- duct ectasia syndrome

- breast engorgement

The diagnosis of IgG4-related prostatitis could be made from histological examination if prostate biopsy or surgery has been performed. The hallmark histopathological features of established IgG4-related disease are storiform fibrosis, a dense lymphoplasmacytic (lymphocytes and plasma cells) infiltrate rich in IgG4-positive plasma cells, and obliterative phlebitis.

However, identification depends on whether or not urologists and pathologists are aware of IgG4-related prostatitis/disease, as special immunostaining is required to identify the characteristic IgG4-positive plasma cells infiltration in prostatic tissue.