Quantification of Gleason Pattern 4 Metrics Identifies Pathologic Progression in Patients With Grade Group 2 Prostate Cancer on Active Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: During active surveillance (AS) for Grade Group (GG) 2 prostate cancer, pathologic progression to GG3 on surveillance biopsy is a trigger for intervention. However, this ratio of GP3:GP4, may be obscured by increases of relatively indolent disease. We aimed to explore changes in GP4 quantity during AS and propose alternative definitions for progression based on GP4 changes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We assessed patients enrolled on AS between November 2014 and March 2020 with GG2 disease on diagnostic biopsy and subsequent surveillance biopsy approximately 1 year later. Outcome measures included change in overall %GP4 and total length GP4 (mm). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: 61 patients met the inclusion criteria, the median change in total length of GP4 and %GP4 was -0.12 mm (IQR -0.31, 0.09) and -2.5% (IQR -8.6, 0.0), respectively. Excluding the 35 patients with no evidence of GP4 on surveillance biopsy, median change in total GP4 length and %GP4 was 0.19 mm (IQR -0.04, 0.67) and 1.2% (IQR -1.6, 6.6), respectively. Three patients progressed to GG3 disease on surveillance biopsy, one of whom had only a small increase in %GP4. Conversely, an additional 2 patients who did not meet the criterion for GG3 had a large increase (> 1 mm) in total GP4 length. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of GG3 disease on surveillance biopsy as a trigger for treatment in men on AS is of questionable use alone; we suggest including other measures that do not depend on a ratio, such as an increase in total GP4 length.

Oncologic Outcomes of Incidental Versus Biopsy-diagnosed Grade Group 1 Prostate Cancer: A Multi-institutional Study.

Background and objective: Patients diagnosed with grade group (GG) 1 prostate cancer (PCa) following treatment for benign disease ("incidental" PCa) are typically managed with active surveillance (AS). It is not known how their outcomes compare with those observed in patients diagnosed with GG1 on biopsy. We aimed at determining whether long-term oncologic outcomes of AS for patients with GG1 PCa differ according to the type of diagnosis: incidental versus biopsy detected. Methods: A retrospective, multi-institutional analysis of PCa patients with GG1 on AS at eight institutions was conducted. Competing risk analyses estimated the incidence of metastases, PCa mortality, and conversion to treatment. As a secondary analysis, we estimated the risk of GG ≥2 on the first follow-up biopsy according to the type of initial diagnosis. Key findings and limitations: A total of 213 versus 1900 patients with incidental versus biopsy-diagnosed GG1 were identified. Patients with incidental cancers were followed with repeated biopsies and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging less frequently than those diagnosed on biopsy. The 10-yr incidence of treatment was 22% for incidental cancers versus 53% for biopsy (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.46, p < 0.001). Distant metastases developed in one patient with incidental cancer versus 17 diagnosed on biopsy and were diagnosed with molecular imaging in 13 (72%) patients. The 10-yr incidence of metastases was 0.8% for patients with incidental PCa and 2% for those diagnosed on biopsy (sHR 0.35, 95% CI 0.05-2.54, p = 0.3). The risk of GG ≥2 on the first follow-up biopsy was low if the initial diagnosis was incidental (7% vs 22%, p < 0.001). Conclusions and clinical implications: Patients with GG1 incidental PCa should be evaluated further to exclude aggressive disease, preferably with a biopsy. If no cancer is found on biopsy, then they should receive the same follow-up of a patient with a negative biopsy. Further research should confirm whether imaging and biopsies can be avoided if postoperative prostate-specific antigen is low (<1-2 ng/ml). Patient summary: We compared the outcomes of patients with low-grade prostate cancer on active surveillance according to the type of their initial diagnosis. Patients who have low-grade cancer diagnosed on a procedure to relieve urinary symptoms (incidental prostate cancer) are followed less intensively and undergo curative-intended treatment less frequently. We also found that patients with incidental prostate cancer are more likely to have no cancer on their first follow-up biopsy than patients who have low-grade cancer initially diagnosed on a biopsy. These patients have a more favorable prognosis than their biopsy-detected counterparts and should be managed the same way as patients with negative biopsies if they undergo a subsequent biopsy that shows no cancer.

How a population-based cohort of men estimate lifetime risk of prostate cancer in a survey before entering a prostate cancer screening trial in Sweden?

OBJECTIVES: Investigating men's perceived lifetime risk of prostate cancer. DESIGN: Survey-based study to men invited for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in the GÖTEBORG-2 trial between September 2015 and June 2020. SETTING: 38 775 men in the Gothenburg area, Sweden, were invited for PSA-testing and participated in a survey. PARTICIPANTS: 17 980 men participated in PSA-testing, of whom 13 189 completed the survey. In addition, 1264 men answered the survey only. INTERVENTIONS: Before having the PSA-test, men answered an electronic survey and estimated their lifetime risk of receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis on a visual analogue scale from 0% to 100%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the median lifetime risk estimation, which was compared with Wilcoxon test to an anticipated lifetime risk of 20% (based on GÖTEBORG-1 trial). The secondary outcome was to determine factors associated with risk estimation in a multivariable linear regression model: previous prostate examination, family history, physical exercise, healthy diet, comorbidity, alcohol consumption, smoking, education level, marital status, urinary symptoms and erectile dysfunction. RESULTS: Among PSA-tested men, the median estimated lifetime risk of prostate cancer was 30% (IQR 19% to 50%), corresponding to a 10 percentage-points higher estimation compared with the anticipated risk (p<0.001). Family history of prostate cancer, moderate to severe urinary symptoms and mild to moderate erectile dysfunction were associated with >5 percentage-points higher risk estimation. Similar results were obtained for non-PSA-tested men. CONCLUSIONS: Most men overestimated their prostate cancer risk which underscores the importance of providing them accurate information about prostate cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN94604465.

Randomized Trial of Transverse vs Vertical Extraction Site Incision After Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Incisional hernias are a frequent complication following robotic radical prostatectomy. Observational data in men undergoing robotic prostatectomy suggest that transverse closure resulted in lower hernia rates than vertical closure. We sought to compare the incidence of incisional hernia after robotic radical prostatectomy after vertical and transverse extraction site closure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a clinically integrated, crossover, cluster randomized trial at a single tertiary referral center (January 2016-September 2021) comparing the rate of hernia after transverse vs vertical extraction site excision in 1356 patients treated with minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. The primary outcome was between-group incidence of incisional hernia within 15 months of prostatectomy defined by physical examination and self-reported patient surveys. RESULTS: Overall, 197 (20%) patients developed an incisional hernia within 15 months, 797 did not have an incisional hernia within this period, and 362 had missing outcome data regarding incisional hernia. We found no significant difference in hernia rates between the 2 incision types (absolute between-group difference 1.8%; 95% CI -3.4%, 6.6%; P = .5) in the primary analysis or in the 3 sensitivity analyses. Notably, because of the inclusive definition of hernia used, these data cannot be used as an estimate of the true prevalence of incisional hernia. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons should choose the incision and closure approach they are most comfortable with when extracting specimens. Studies of modifications to the surgical technique are best conducted as randomized comparisons, and the clinically integrated, crossover, cluster randomized trial allows large trials to be completed at a single center and at low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01407263.

Does Diabetes Have a Negative Impact on Erectile Function Recovery After Radical Prostatectomy?

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the risk of long-term post-radical prostatectomy (RP) erectile dysfunction (ED) in men with diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: We included men who underwent RP and were followed for ≥24 months at our institution; men were excluded if they received androgen deprivation therapy or radiation therapy. Erectile function recovery (EFR) was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Erectile Function Domain (EFD) score pre-RP and serially during follow-up. We performed logistic regression analysis to investigate a potential association between erectile function 24 months post-RP. RESULTS: Of 2261 men included, 8% were diabetic. Men in the diabetic group tended to present with more vascular comorbidities. For men with DM, the median time from diagnosis was 4 years pre-RP, and the median hemoglobin A1c pre-RP was 6.7%. After 24 months post-RP, EFR was significantly lower among the diabetic group. The median EFD was 7. Men with DM had a lower proportion of functional EFR (17%) and a greater proportion of severe ED (57%). In the univariable logistic regression model to analyze DM diagnosis was a significant predictor of functional EFR (OR 0.43, P <.001) and severe ED (OR 1.85, P <.001) 24 months post-RP. Furthermore, this was not observed for a multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Twenty-four months after RP, EFR is compromised in individuals with DM.

Randomized trials of PSA screening.

BACKGROUND: The role of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in prostate cancer (PCa) screening has evolved over recent decades with multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) spurring guideline changes. At present, controversy exists due to the indolent nature of many prostate cancers and associated risks of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. This review examines major RCTs evaluating PSA screening to inform clinical practices. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We summarize findings from primary RCTs investigating PSA screening's impact on PCa mortality and incidence: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial, the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), and the Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP). RESULTS: The PLCO Trial randomized men to annual PSA and DRE screening or usual care, reporting no significant difference in PCa mortality between groups at 17 years (RR 0.93, [95% CI: 0.81-1.08]), yet significantly increased detection and concomitant decreased detection in Gleason 6 (RR 1.17, [95% CI: 1.11-1.23]) and 8-10 disease (RR 0.89, [95% CI: 0.80-0.99]) in the screening group, respectively. The ESPRC Trial randomized men across seven European countries to PSA screening every 2-4 years or usual care, noting a 20% reduction in PCa mortality at 9 years (RR 0.81, [95% CI: 0.65-0.98]) and significant decrease in metastatic disease at 12 years (RR 0.70, [95% CI: 0.60-0.82]). The CAP Trial assessed a single PSA screening test's impact on PCa mortality yielding no significant difference in PCa mortality at 10 years (RR 0.96, [95% CI: 0.85-1.08]). Limitations amongst studies included high contamination between study arms and low compliance with study protocols. CONCLUSIONS: While the CAP and initial PLCO trials showed no significant reduction in PCa mortality, the ERSPC demonstrated a 21% reduction at 13 years, with further benefits at extended follow-up. Differences in outcomes are attributed to variations in trial design, contamination, adherence rates, and PSA thresholds. Future studies are needed focus on optimizing screening intervals, targeting high-risk populations, and incorporating non-invasive diagnostic tools to improve screening efficacy and reduce associated harms.

Gabapentin and Rapidity of Recovery Among Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Ambulatory Uro-Oncologic Surgeries.

INTRODUCTION: Gabapentin has been used in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways for pain control for patients undergoing ambulatory uro-oncologic surgery; however, it may cause undesirable side effects. We studied the causal association between gabapentin and rapidity of recovery and perioperative pain management after minimally invasive uro-oncologic surgery. METHODS: We identified 2397 patients ≤ 65 years undergoing prostatectomies or nephrectomies between 2018 and 2022; 131 (5.5%) did not receive gabapentin. We tested the effect of gabapentin use on time of discharge and perioperative opioid consumption, respectively, using multivariable linear regression adjusting for potential confounders including age, gender, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and surgery type. RESULTS: On adjusted analysis, we found no evidence of a difference in discharge time among those who did vs did not receive gabapentin (adjusted difference 0.07 hours shorter on gabapentin; 95% CI -0.17, 0.31; P = .6). There was no evidence of a difference in intraoperative opioid consumption by gabapentin receipt (adjusted difference -1.5 morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI -4.2, 1.1; P = .3) or probability of being in the top quartile of postoperative opioid consumption within 24 hours (adjusted difference 4.2%; 95% CI -4.8%, 13%; P = .4). We saw no important differences in confounders by gabapentin receipt suggesting causal conclusions are justified. CONCLUSIONS: Our confidence intervals did not include clinically meaningful benefits from gabapentin, when used with an ERAS protocol, in terms of length of stay or perioperative opioid use. These results support the omission of gabapentin from ERAS protocols for minimally invasive uro-oncologic surgeries.

Incorporating the Distress Thermometer into preoperative vital signs in patients undergoing ambulatory oncology surgery: a pilot feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the extensive literature supporting distress screening at relevant transitions of care, the implementation of distress screening remains limited in ambulatory surgery settings. Our multidisciplinary team completed a pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of including a standardized psychosocial assessment, the Distress Thermometer (DT), with the collection of admission vital signs by Patient Care Technicians (PCTs) in patients undergoing oncology surgery. METHODS: We assessed feasibility by the response rate and acceptability through discussions with the PCTs. RESULTS: Of the 189 men who underwent radical prostatectomy at our center, 71 were approached with the DT scale, and all patients who were approached completed the DT with no missing data. The staff reported no issues with data collection. A total of 21/71 (30%; 95% CI 19%, 42%) reported a clinically relevant distress DT ≥ 4. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that incorporating the DT into vital sign collection was feasible, acceptable, and provided a valuable assessment.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Performance of 4Kscore as a Reflex Test to Prostate-specific Antigen in the GÖTEBORG-2 Prostate Cancer Screening Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether adding 4Kscore as a reflex test to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) could improve the screening algorithm for prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: In the GÖTEBORG-2 PC screening trial, 38 000men (50-60 yr) were invited to PSA testing and, if elevated, followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For 571 men with PSA ≥3.0 ng/ml and evaluable outcomes, 4Kscore was calculated. The performance using a prespecified 4Kscore cutoff of 7.5% was evaluated. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The area under the curve for 4Kscore to identify intermediate- and high-risk PC was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.79-0.89), and the positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 15% (0.12-0.20) and 99% (97-100%), respectively. Of the 54 men diagnosed with intermediate- or high-grade PC, two had a 4Kscore cutoff below 7.5%, both with organ-confined intermediate-risk PC. Per 1000 men with elevated PSA, adding 4Kscore would have resulted in avoidance of MRI for 408 (41%) men, biopsies for 95 (28% reduction) men, and diagnosis of 23 low-grade cancers (23% reduction) while delaying the diagnosis of four men with intermediate-grade cancers (4%). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Including 4Kscore as a reflex test for men with elevated PSA reduces the need for MRI and biopsy markedly, and results in less overdiagnosis of low-grade PC at the cost of delaying the diagnosis of intermediate-grade PC in a few men. These results add further evidence for including new blood-based biomarkers in addition to PSA to improve the harm and benefit ratio of PC screening and reduce the need for resource-demanding MRI and biopsies.

Provider Perceptions of an Electronic Health Record Prostate Cancer Screening Tool.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a focus group to assess the attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) toward prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-screening algorithms, perceptions of using decision support tools, and features that would make such tools feasible to implement. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team (primary care, urology, behavioral sciences, bioinformatics) developed the decision support tool that was presented to a focus group of 10 PCPs who also filled out a survey. Notes and audio-recorded transcripts were analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. RESULTS: The survey showed that PCPs followed different guidelines. In total, 7/10 PCPs agreed that engaging in shared decision-making about PSA screening was burdensome. The majority (9/10) had never used a decision aid for PSA screening. Although 70% of PCPs felt confident about their ability to discuss PSA screening, 90% still felt a need for a provider-facing platform to assist in these discussions. Three major themes emerged: (1) confirmatory reactions regarding the importance, innovation, and unmet need for a decision support tool embedded in the electronic health record; (2) issues around implementation and application of the tool in clinic workflow and PCPs' own clinical bias; and (3) attitudes/reflections regarding discrepant recommendations from various guideline groups that cause confusion. CONCLUSION: There was overwhelmingly positive support for the need for a provider-facing decision support tool to assist with PSA-screening decisions in the primary care setting. PCPs appreciated that the tool would allow flexibility for clinical judgment and documentation of shared decision-making. Incorporation of suggestions from this focus group into a second version of the tool will be used in subsequent pilot testing.

A Provider-Facing Decision Support Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to pilot test an electronic health record-embedded decision support tool to facilitate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening discussions in the primary care setting. METHODS: We pilot-tested a novel decision support tool that was used by 10 primary care physicians (PCPs) for 6 months, followed by a survey. The tool comprised (1) a risk-stratified algorithm, (2) a tool for facilitating shared decision-making (Simple Schema), (3) three best practice advisories (BPAs: <45, 45-75, and >75 years), and (4) a health maintenance module for scheduling automated reminders about PSA rescreening. RESULTS: All PCPs found the tool feasible, acceptable, and clear to use. Eight out of ten PCPs reported that the tool made PSA screening conversations somewhat or much easier. Before using the tool, 70% of PCPs felt confident in their ability to discuss PSA screening with their patient, and this improved to 100% after the tool was used by PCPs for 6 months. PCPs found the BPAs for eligible (45-75 years) and older men (>75 years) more useful than the BPA for younger men (<45 years). Among the 10 PCPs, 60% found the Simple Schema to be very useful, and 50% found the health maintenance module to be extremely or very useful. Most PCPs reported the components of the tool to be at least somewhat useful, with 10% finding them to be very burdensome. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the tool, which is notable given the marked low acceptance of existing tools. All PCPs reported that they would consider continuing to use the tool in their clinic and were likely or very likely to recommend the tool to a colleague.

Impact of Replacing Fentanyl With Hydromorphone as the First-Line Postoperative Opioid Among Patients Undergoing Outpatient Cancer Surgery.

PURPOSE: In response to a nationwide fentanyl shortage, our institution assessed whether changing our first-line postoperative intravenous opioid from fentanyl to hydromorphone impacted patient outcomes. The primary research aim was to evaluate the association between first-line opioid and rapidity of recovery. DESIGN: The study team retrospectively obtained data on all consecutive patients extracted from the electronic medical record. The rapidity of recovery was defined as the time from entry into the postanesthesia care unit to the transition to Phase 2 for ambulatory extended recovery patients and as the length of total postanesthesia care unit stay for outpatients. METHODS: Following intent-to-treat-principles, we tested the association between study period and rapidity of recovery (a priori clinically meaningful difference: 20 minutes) using multivariable linear regression, adjusting for anesthesia type (general vs monitored anesthesia care), American Society of Anesthesiologst physical status (ASA) score (1-2 vs 3-4), age, service, robotic procedure, and surgery start time. FINDINGS: Ambulatory extended recovery patients treated in the hydromorphone period had, on average, a 0.25 minute (95% confidence interval [CI] -6.5, 7.0), nonstatistically significant (P > .9) longer time to transition. For outpatient procedures, those who received hydromorphone had, on average, 8.5-minute longer stays (95% CI 3.7-13, P < .001). Although we saw statistical evidence of an increased risk of resurgery associated with receiving hydromorphone (0.5%; 95% CI -0.1%, 1.0%; P = .039 on univariate analysis), the size of the estimate is clinically and biologically implausible and is most likely a chance finding related either to multiple testing or confounding. CONCLUSIONS: The multidisciplinary team concluded that the increase in postoperative length of stay associated with hydromorphone was not clinically significant and the decrease waste of prefilled syringes outweighed the small potential increased risk of resurgery compared to the shorter-acting fentanyl. We will therefore use hydromorphone moving forward.

Electronic Patient-Reported Symptoms After Ambulatory Cancer Surgery.

Importance: Complex cancer procedures are now performed in the ambulatory surgery setting. Remote symptom monitoring (RSM) with electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) can identify patients at risk for acute hospital encounters. Defining normal recovery is needed to set patient expectations and optimize clinical team responses to manage evolving problems in real time. Objective: To describe the patterns of postoperative recovery among patients undergoing ambulatory cancer surgery with RSM using an ePRO platform-the Recovery Tracker. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent 1 of 5 of the most common procedures (prostatectomy, nephrectomy, mastectomy, hysterectomy, or thyroidectomy) at the Josie Robertson Surgery Center at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from September 2016 to June 2022. Patients completed the Recovery Tracker, a brief ePRO platform assessing symptoms for 10 days after surgery. Data were analyzed from September 2022 to May 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Symptom severity and interference were estimated by postoperative day and procedure. Results: A total of 12 433 patients were assigned 110 936 surveys. Of these patients, 7874 (63%) were female, and the median (IQR) age at surgery was 57 (47-65) years. The survey response rate was 87% (10 814 patients responding to at least 1 of 10 daily surveys). Among patients who submitted at least 1 survey, the median (IQR) number of surveys submitted was 7 (4-8), and each assessment took a median (IQR) of 1.7 (1.2-2.5) minutes to complete. Symptom burden was modest in this population, with the highest severity on postoperative days 1 to 3. Pain was moderate initially and steadily improved. Fatigue was reported by 6120 patients (57%) but was rarely severe. Maximum pain and fatigue responses (very severe) were reported by 324 of 10 814 patients (3%) and 106 of 10 814 patients (1%), respectively. The maximum pain severity (severe or very severe) was highest after nephrectomy (92 of 332 [28%]), followed by mastectomy with reconstruction (817 of 3322 [25%]) and prostatectomy (744 of 3543 [21%]). Nausea (occasionally, frequently, or almost constantly) was common and experienced on multiple days by 1485 of 9300 patients (16%), but vomiting was less common (139 of 10 812 [1%]). Temperature higher than 38 °C was reported by 740 of 10 812 (7%). Severe or very severe shortness of breath was reported by 125 of 10 813 (1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Defining detailed postoperative symptom burden through this analysis provides valuable data to inform further implementation and maintenance of RSM programs in surgical oncology patients. These data can enhance patient education, set expectations, and support research to allow iterative improvement of clinical care based on the patient-reported experience after discharge.

Remote Symptom Monitoring with Clinical Alerts Following Mastectomy: Do Early Symptoms Predict 30-Day Surgical Complications.

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) for real-time remote symptom monitoring facilitate early recognition of postoperative complications. We sought to determine whether remote, electronic, patient-reported symptom-monitoring with Recovery Tracker predicts 30-day readmission or reoperation in outpatient mastectomy patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of breast cancer patients who underwent outpatient (< 24-h stay) mastectomy with or without reconstruction from April 2017 to January 2022 and who received the Recovery Tracker on Days 1-10 postoperatively. Of 5,130 patients, 3,888 met the inclusion criteria (2,880 mastectomy with immediate reconstruction and 1,008 mastectomy only). We focused on symptoms concerning for surgical complications and assessed if symptoms reaching prespecified alert levels-prompting a nursing call-predicted risk of 30-day readmission or reoperation. RESULTS: Daily Recovery Tracker response rates ranged from 45% to 70%. Overall, 1,461 of 3,888 patients (38%) triggered at least one alert. Most red (urgent) alerts were triggered by pain and fever; most yellow (less urgent) alerts were triggered by wound redness and pain severity. The 30-day readmission and reoperation rates were low at 3.8% and 2.4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant association between symptom alerts and 30-day reoperation or readmission, and a clinically relevant increase in risk can be excluded (odds ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval 0.8-1.46; p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with or without reconstruction in the ambulatory setting have a low burden of concerning symptoms, even in the first few days after surgery. Patients can be reassured that symptoms that do present resolve quickly thereafter.

Patient-reported Side Effects 1 Year After Radical Prostatectomy or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Register-based Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Data on functional and psychological side effects following curative treatment for prostate cancer are lacking from large, contemporary, unselected, population-based cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To assess urinary symptoms, bowel disturbances, erectile dysfunction (ED), and quality of life (QoL) 12 mo after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiotherapy (RT) using patient-reported outcome measures in the Swedish prostate cancer database. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a nationwide, population-based, cohort study in Sweden of men who underwent primary RARP or RT between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Absolute proportions and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression, with adjustment for clinical characteristics. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 2557 men underwent RARP and 1741 received RT. Men who underwent RT were older (69 vs 65 yr) and had more comorbidities at baseline. After RARP, 13% of men experienced incontinence, compared to 6% after RT. The frequency of urinary bother was similar, at 18% after RARP and 18% after RT. Urgency to defecate was reported by 14% of men after RARP and 34% after RT. At 1 yr, 73% of men had ED after RARP, and 77% after RT. High QoL was reported by 85% of men after RARP and 78% of men after RT. On multivariable regression analysis, RT was associated with lower risks of urinary incontinence (OR 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.33), urinary bother (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.95), and ED (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.65), but higher risk of bowel symptoms (OR 2.86, 95% CI 2.42-3.39). QoL was higher after RARP than after RT (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term specific side effects after curative treatment for prostate cancer significantly differed between RARP and RT in this large and unselected cohort. Nevertheless, the risk of urinary bother was lower after RT, while higher QoL was common after RARP. PATIENT SUMMARY: In our study of patients treated for prostate cancer, urinary bother and overall quality of life are comparable at 1 year after surgical removal of the prostate in comparison to radiotherapy, despite substantial differences in other side effects.