Guest Editor(s)
Prof. Renjun Gu
Email: renjungu@njucm.edu.cn
Affiliation: Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China
Homepage:
Research Interests: evidence based medicine, oncology, tumor markers, clinical studies, meta-analysis
Prof. Yipeng Xu
Email: xuyp1631@zjcc.org.cn
Affiliation: Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China
Homepage:
Research Interests: evidence-based urology, genitourinary oncology, urinary system tumors; clinical controversies, translational research, precision oncology, minimally invasive urologic surgery, contemporary urological practice
Summary
Background and Importance
Contemporary urologic practice faces rapid technological innovation, expanding treatment options, and persistent clinical controversies—from optimal prostate cancer screening strategies to the comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) therapies. While high-quality clinical evidence accumulates, its translation into daily decision-making remains inconsistent. Moreover, the bridge between laboratory discoveries and clinical application often lacks systematic evaluation. This Special Issue addresses the critical gap between published research—both clinical and basic—and evidence-informed practice, recognizing that rigorous synthesis of available data across the translational spectrum is essential for improving patient outcomes, reducing practice variation, and guiding future research investment in urologic care.
Aim and Scope
This Special Issue aims to assemble high-quality evidence syntheses that provide actionable insights for practicing urologists, residents, researchers, and basic scientists. We welcome systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and critical evidence appraisals that adhere to PRISMA guidelines and incorporate GRADE methodology where applicable. Importantly, the scope extends to include systematic reviews of preclinical and translational research, including animal models, mechanistic studies, biomarker discovery, and therapeutic target validation. Submissions should move beyond descriptive summaries to offer clear conclusions, identify knowledge gaps, propose future research directions, and—for preclinical topics—address methodological quality and reproducibility concerns. Both confirmatory and controversial topics are welcome, provided methodological rigor supports the stated conclusions.
Suggested Themes
· Evidence-based management of localized prostate cancer: active surveillance, focal therapy, and radical treatment comparisons
· Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for BPH
· Systematic reviews on stone prevention and intervention thresholds
· Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: chemotherapy versus immunotherapy
· Outcomes research using large-scale registries and real-world data
· Preclinical evidence synthesis in urologic oncology: animal models of prostate and bladder cancer
· Systematic reviews of biomarker validation studies in urologic diseases
· Methodological standards for evidence synthesis in translational urology research
Keywords
evidence-based urology, systematic review, clinical decision-making, translational research, urologic oncology
Login
Register
Submit a Paper
Propose a Special lssue