In this issue, four Original Articles with one Editorial Comment, two Review Articles, a Guideline and a Case Report with an Editorial Comment were published in the International Journal of Urology. Homma et al. (Tokyo, Japan) presented the Japanese guidelines for male lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia updated as of the end of 2016. As the target readers are urologists and non-urologist general physicians, two sets of clinical algorithms were prepared, not only for general physicians, but also for urologists. Another point might be the management of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, which has become the first-line drug, as well as α1-blockers for patients with functional lower urinary tract disorders with or without benign prostatic hyperplasia. Two important reviews are published in the field of urological malignancies including urothelial cancer. Miyazaki and Nishiyama (Tsukuba, Japan) reported the epidemiology of urothelial carcinoma. It is interesting that thiazolidinediones, oral drugs for diabetes mellitus, reported initially as a potential inducer of urinary bladder cancer, proved to be negative in the later large cohort study. Increasing evidence suggests immuno-oncology drugs might lead to a paradigm shift for the treatment of advanced urothelial cancer. Obara et al. (Morioka, Japan) published recent advances, an ongoing trial of immuno-oncology drugs for urological malignancies, and future challenges regarding improving higher efficacy and reliable biomarkers. Unfortunately, there is no single biomarker that predicts the clinical outcome. Investigation of predictive biomarkers, novel agents and improved combination strategies is required. Although androgen deprivation therapy is often used for patients with prostate cancer, its negative impact regarding psychiatric effects remains controversial. Dinh et al. (Seattle, USA) searched 78 552 men aged ≥66 years with stage I–III prostate cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database, and concluded that androgen deprivation therapy, out of which the primary androgen deprivation therapy cohort was just 29.1%, was associated with an elevated risk of anxiety in this cohort of elderly men with localized prostate cancer. The results might change according to different cohorts, such as other ethnic groups, or stage IV disease. Recent studies suggest that bladder dysfunction might also be associated with post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. Yamada et al. (Tokyo, Japan) reported that overactive bladder is a negative predictor of achieving continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Although the cohort number was limited, and data on the length of membranous urethra were lacking; the figure, illustrated on the cover page, showing the proportion of types of incontinence by 3, 6 and 12 months after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, strongly suggests (de novo) urgency incontinence increases with time. Ethnic variations in cancer outcome vary widely depending on the specific type of cancer. Suarez-Sarmiento et al. (New Haven, USA) reported ethnic disparities in renal cell carcinoma by an analysis of Hispanic patients in a single-payer healthcare system. None declared.