Prostate cancer (PCa) is a common malignancy in men and is among the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Genomic tests assess disease aggressiveness and guide treatment, particularly in low- and intermediate-risk PCa. We reviewed the literature on the use of four genomic tests (Prolaris^®, Promark^®, Oncotype DX^®, and Decipher^®) in assessing the prognosis of PCa and their use in treatment decision-making. Most of the studies showed that Prolaris^® has a strong correlation with biochemical recurrence, metastasis risk, PCa-specific mortality (PCSM), and pathological features. Similarly, three studies on Promark^® indicated a connection between results and pathological features in the subsequent prostatectomy, time to metastasis, and biochemical recurrence. Fourteen studies on Oncotype DX^® showed a clear correlation between high scores, death, and PCSM. One study found that routine biopsy pathology reports, combined with serum PSA levels, provide a risk assessment comparable to Oncotype DX^® testing. Results from 22 studies on Decipher^® were controversial. The test was associated with conservative management, suggesting that patients with a high GC score are more likely to need radiation after surgery. Comparative studies indicated that Oncotype DX^® is preferable for assessing PCSM, Decipher^® for predicting metastasis, and Prolaris^® for predicting recurrence. With the incidence rate of PCa dramatically increasing, genomic tests appear to be useful adjunctive precision medicine tools with significant potential in improving prognostic discrimination, facilitating better risk stratification, and guiding personalized treatment, especially in the intermediate-risk patient group. Large-scale, prospective, multi-sectional studies are required to validate the utility of these tests prior to their integration into clinical practice.

Urolithiasis represents one of the most common urologic diseases, and its incidence demonstrates, globally, an increasing trend. The application of preventive measures is an established strategy to reduce urolithiasis-related morbidity, and it is based mostly on the adaptation of lifestyle factors and pharmacotherapy. Furthermore, other research areas demonstrate promising results, such as the research on the microbiome. In the current review, we searched for the latest data on lifestyle–based prevention and microbiome alterations in urolithiasis patients. The majority of the proposed lifestyle measures are already included in the urological guidelines, while additional factors, such as vitamin D supplementation, seem to have a putative positive effect. From the microbiome studies, several microbial composition patterns and metabolic pathways demonstrated an inhibiting or promoting role in lithogenesis. Up to the present, stone prevention has not shown satisfying results, which suggests that lifestyle measures are not adequate. Moreover, microbiome studies are prone to bias, since microbes are strongly affected by numerous clinical factors, while the analysis procedures are not standardized yet. Analysis standardization and data pooling from extensive registration of clinical and microbiome data are essential steps in order to improve the existing prevention strategy with targeted microbiome manipulations.