Rais‐Bahrami, Soroush

Introduction The introduction of the purpose‐built single‐port (SP) robotic platform has allowed for the advent of regionalized minimally invasive surgical approaches for robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP), including the extraperitoneal and transvesical techniques. This study sought to develop a best practice consensus on the key principles, patient selection, surgical techniques, expected clinical outcomes, and learning curves pertaining to SP‐RARP. Methods A modified Delphi consensus was developed by a panel of experts, consisting of a 33‐item questionnaire, with each statement rated using a binary Likert scale (‘agree’ or ‘disagree’). The survey was distributed via email to all practicing SP‐RARP surgeons across the USA and Europe. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement on a given statement. Results A total of 53 surgeons participated in the Delphi Consensus across the two rounds. Of 33 statements, 28 (84.8%) reached agreement in the first round. The remaining consensus was achieved in the second round, involving 35 surgeons, and with one additional statement. The panel agreed that, although are no absolute contraindications to SP‐RARP, the preference towards specific SP‐RARP techniques should remain guided by the individual patients and surgical expertise. Although the SP extraperitoneal technique is recommended to pursue pelvic lymph node dissections, the panel agreed that transvesical SP‐RARP showed promise in promoting shorter hospital stay, faster recovery of urinary continence, and utility in patients with extensive prior abdominal surgery. Consensus was also reached on the need for a structured training pathway, with most recommending beginning with extraperitoneal SP‐RARP before advancing to the transvesical approach. Conclusion This Delphi consensus demonstrates broad agreement among experienced SP surgeons in the USA and Europe, forming the foundation for future research on the clinical utility and necessary training pathways for SP‐RARP. Nevertheless, empirical validation based on clinical data from large cohort studies remains important.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s discussions on select 2026 updates to the guidelines regarding nonmetastatic disease: the elimination of the very-low-risk group, updates to the Principles of Active Surveillance, and caution in the use of focal therapy in newly diagnosed patients.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions for patients with prostate cancer across the disease spectrum. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). For patients with mCSPC, disease characteristics, such as whether metastases arose synchronously or metachronously and the degree of metastatic burden, impact therapy decisions, including how much treatment intensification is appropriate and when prostate-directed and/or metastasis-directed therapy should be considered. In the mCRPC setting, androgen deprivation therapy is continued with the sequential or concurrent addition of certain androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, biomarkers, the extent and location of metastases, symptoms, and potential side effects.

The NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer provide recommendations for the multidisciplinary approach to the diagnostic workup, treatment, and follow-up for testicular germ cell tumors, including both seminoma and nonseminoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the current treatment recommendations and supporting clinical data for seminomas as presented in Version 2.2025 of the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer.

Objectives. To compare the clinicopathologic characteristics of urothelial carcinoma (UC), urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation (UCSD), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the bladder, which have been suggested to differ in terms of risk factors, immunophenotype, and prognosis. Methods. We evaluated the clinicopathologic features of radical cystectomy specimens between 1980 and 2015 with a diagnosis of SCC, UCSD, and UC. PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (clinically available clones 22C3, SP142, and SP263) was performed on SCC and UCSD. Multivariate Cox regression was used to identify prognostic factors. Kaplan–Meier curves were plotted to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results. Of the 1478 cases, there were 1126 UC (76%), 217 UCSD (15%), and 135 SCC (9%). Bladder cancer was more common in men than women (80% vs 20%, P < .0001). However, a higher proportion of SCC and UCSD occurred in women (SCC-36%, UCSD-22%, UC-18%). Women were significantly more likely to be never smokers in all 3 cohorts (UC: 45% vs 16%, UCSD: 44% vs 12%, SCC: 40% vs 18%, P < .0001). Patients with SCC and UCSD were at a higher pathologic stage (>pT2) at the time of cystectomy (UCSD-74%, SCC 71%, UC-44%, P < .0001) and had worse CSS compared to patients with UC ( P = 0.006). SCC had higher PD-L1 scores (all clones) than UCSD ( P < .0001). PD-L1 22C3 ( P = .02, HR: 0.36) and SP142 scores ( P = .046, HR: 0.27) predicted CSS on Kaplan–Meier analysis for SCC cases. Conclusions. UC, UCSD, and SCC are associated with different risk factors, gender distributions, and clinical outcomes. PD-L1 is expressed in SCC and UCSD, suggesting some patients may benefit from targeted therapy.

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.