Receipt of definitive therapy in elderly patients with unfavorable-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Conservative management of aggressive prostate cancer in the elderly without definitive therapy has been associated with a 10-year prostate cancer-specific mortality of approximately 50%. The authors examined the prevalence of definitive therapy in elderly patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk disease. METHODS: 411,343 patients who were diagnosed from 2004 through 2012 with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer were identified in the National Cancer Database. Multivariable logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidity was used to examine the association between age and receipt of definitive therapy, defined as radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and of primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) among patients who did not receive definitive therapy. RESULTS: In total, 87.1% of high-risk patients and 91.9% of intermediate-risk patients received definitive therapy. When stratified by age, 93.7%, 92.1%, 90.8%, 87.6%, 80.9%, and 55.2% of high-risk patients and 96.1%, 94.7%, 93.4%, 89.7%, 82.7%, and 62.8% of intermediate-risk patients ages <60, 60 to 64, 65 to 69, 70 to 74, 75 to 79, and ≥80 years received definitive therapy, respectively. For both high-risk and intermediate-risk patients, increasing age was significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving definitive therapy overall (both P < .001) and a greater likelihood of receiving primary ADT among those who did not receive definitive therapy (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Older age was significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving definitive therapy and an increased likelihood of receiving primary ADT in this national cohort of patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer. Notably, approximately 40% to 45% of patients aged ≥80 years did not receive definitive therapy. These findings are alarming given the dismal outcomes of conservatively managed unfavorable-risk prostate cancer. Cancer 2017;123:4832-40. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Analgesia Administration by Sex Among Pediatric Emergency Department Patients with Abdominal Pain.

Background: There is conflicting data about sex-based differences in the treatment of acute pain in the ED. Little is known about sex-based disparities in analgesia in pediatric ED patients. Objectives: Our objective was to determine whether analgesic administration rates differ between female and male pediatric patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED patients 5-21 years old with abdominal pain between 6/1/19 and 6/30/21. The primary outcome was receipt of any analgesia, and secondary outcomes were receipt of opioid analgesia and time to receipt of analgesia. Multivariable regression models were fitted for each outcome. Results: We studied 1,087 patients; 681 (63%) were female with a median age of 17 years (IQR 13, 19) and 406 (37%) were male with a median age of 14 years (IQR 9, 18). 371 female patients (55%) and 180 male patients (44%) received any analgesia. 132 female patients (19%) and 83 male patients (20%) received opioid analgesia. In multivariate analyses, female patients were equally likely to receive any analgesia (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.97 - 1.74, p = 0.07), but time to analgesia was 14% longer (GMR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 - 1.29, p = 0.04). Non-White patients were 32% less likely to receive opioids (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.97, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Female pediatric ED patients were equally likely to receive any analgesia as male patients, but their time to analgesia was longer. Non-White patients were less likely to receive opioid analgesia than White patients.

Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (SMART) for Abdominopelvic Oligometastases.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy can be an effective treatment for oligometastases. However, safe delivery of ablative radiation is frequently limited by the proximity of mobile organs sensitive to high radiation doses. The goal of this study was to determine the feasibility, safety, and disease control outcomes of stereotactic magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) in patients with abdominopelvic oligometastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We identified 101 patients with abdominopelvic oligometastases, including 20 patients enrolled on phase 1 protocols, who were consecutively treated with SMART on a 0.35T magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR linac) at a single institution from October 2019 to September 2021. Local control and overall survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 114 tumors were treated. The most common histology was prostate adenocarcinoma (60 tumors [53.5%]), and 65 sites (57.0%) were centered in the pelvis. Ninety-one sites (79.8%) were treated to 8 Gy × 5, and 49 (43.0%) were treated with breath-hold respiratory gating. Online adaptation resulted in a clinically significant improvement in coverage or organ sparing in 86.6% of delivered fractions. The median time required for adaptation was 24 minutes, and the median time in the treatment room was 58 minutes. With median follow-up of 11.4 months, the 12-month local control was 93% and was higher for prostate adenocarcinoma versus other histologies (100% vs 84%; P = .009). The 12-month overall survival was 96% and was higher for prostate adenocarcinoma versus other histologies (100% vs 91%; P = .046). Three patients (3.0%) developed grade 3 toxic effects (colonic hemorrhage at 3.4 months and urinary tract obstructions at 10.1 and 18.4 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, SMART was feasible, safe, and effective for delivering ablative radiation therapy to abdominopelvic metastases. Adaptive planning was necessary in the large majority of cases. The advantages of SMART warrant its further investigation as a standard option for the treatment of abdominopelvic oligometastases.

Impact of percent positive biopsy cores on cancer-specific mortality for patients with high-risk prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: A high percent positive biopsy cores (PBC), typically dichotomized at ≥50% is prognostic of worse cancer-specific outcomes for patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (CaP). The clinical significance of ≥50% PBC for patients with high-risk disease is poorly understood. We examined the association between ≥50% PBC, compared to <50% PBC, and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) for patients with high-risk disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 7,569 men from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program who were diagnosed with high-risk CaP (Gleason score of 8-10, prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL, or cT3-T4 stage) in 2010-2011 and had 6 to 24 cores sampled at biopsy. Multivariable Fine and Gray competing risks regression was utilized to examine the association between ≥50% PBC and PCSM. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 3.8 years. 56.2% of patients (4,253) had ≥50% PBC. On competing risks regression, ≥50% PBC was associated with a significantly higher risk of PCSM compared to <50% PBC (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-2.70, P < 0.001). On subgroup analyses, ≥50% PBC was associated with a significantly higher risk of PCSM only for cT1-T2 disease (AHR 2.23, 95% CI 1.62-3.07) but not cT3-T4 disease (AHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.39-1.76), with a significant interaction (Pinteraction = 0.016). No significant interactions by Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen level, use of definitive therapy, or number of biopsy cores sampled were observed. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort of patients with high-risk CaP, ≥50% PBC was independently associated with an approximately 2-fold increased risk of PCSM for patients with cT1-T2, but not cT3-T4, tumors. Percent PBC, which is a widely available clinical value, should be routinely used to risk stratify men with high-risk disease and identify patients whom may benefit from treatment intensification.

Risk of Upgrading and Upstaging Among 10 000 Patients with Gleason 3+4 Favorable Intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether active surveillance can be safely offered to patients with Gleason 3+4 favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To examine the incidence and predictors of upgrading and upstaging among patients with Gleason 3+4 FIR disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study involved 10 089 patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed from 2010 to 2012 with Gleason 3+4 disease, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <10ng/ml, and cT1c-2a prostate cancer with <50% positive biopsy cores (PBCs) who underwent radical prostatectomy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Logistic regression was used to examine predictors of upgrading (pathologic Gleason ≥4+3 or tertiary Gleason 5 in a Gleason 7 tumor) or upstaging (pT3-4/N1). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Some 30.3% of Gleason 3+4 FIR patients were upgraded or upstaged. On multivariable analysis, predictors included higher PSA, percentage PBC, age, and cT2a versus cT1c (all p<0.001), but not black race (p=0.895). When stratified into ordinal variables, PSA 8.1-9.9 versus ≤4.0ng/ml (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.93, 38.3% vs 24.4%), PBC 37.5-49.9% versus <12.5% (AOR 1.79, 37.8% vs 25.1%); highest age quartile (≥67 yr) versus lowest (≤55 yr; AOR 1.46, 35.7% vs 24.7%); and cT2a versus cT1c (AOR 1.33, 34.3% vs 29.8%) were associated with a higher risk of upgrading or upstaging (all p<0.001). Men with PBC <12.5% and PSA ≤4.0ng/ml had a 21.7% risk of more advanced disease. This increased to 44.3% for PBC 37.5-49.9% and PSA 8.1-9.9ng/ml. A limitation of the study is its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in three patients with Gleason 3+4 FIR harbored disease of higher grade or stage. Younger patients with low percentage PBC and PSA and cT1c disease have a lower risk and may be candidates for active surveillance. However, widely available clinical information is insufficient for predicting the risk of more advanced disease, and the development and incorporation of additional tools, including magnetic resonance imaging and genomic tests, are necessary. PATIENT SUMMARY: Nearly one-third of patients with Gleason 3+4 favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer harbor disease of higher grade or higher stage than their biopsy and clinical examination suggest. These patients would therefore be poor candidates for active surveillance.

Pathologic Outcomes of Gleason 6 Favorable Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer Treated With Radical Prostatectomy: Implications for Active Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The safety of active surveillance (AS) for Gleason 6 favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) prostate cancer is unknown. To provide guidance, we examined the incidence and predictors of upgrading or upstaging for Gleason 6 FIR patients treated with radical prostatectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 2807 men in the National Cancer Database diagnosed from 2010 to 2012 with Gleason 6 FIR disease (<50% positive biopsy cores [PBC] with either prostate-specific antigen [PSA] of 10-20 ng/mL or cT2b-T2c disease) treated with radical prostatectomy. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of upgrading (Gleason 3+4 with tertiary Gleason 5 or Gleason ≥4+3) or upstaging (pT3-4/N1). RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of the cohort had PSA of 10 to 20 ng/mL; 25.5% patients with PSA of 10 to 20 ng/mL and 12.4% with cT2b to T2c disease were upgraded or upstaged. In multivariable analysis, predictors of upgrading or upstaging included increasing age (P = .026), PSA (P = .001), and percent PBC (P < .001), and black race versus white (P = .035) for patients with PSA of 10 to 20 ng/mL and increasing PSA (P = .001) and percent PBC (P < .001) for patients with cT2b to T2c disease. Men with PSA of 15.0 to 20.0 ng/mL or 37.5% to 49.9% PBC with PSA of 10 to 20 ng/mL had >30% risk of upgrading or upstaging, whereas cT2b to T2c patients with <12.5% PBC or PSA <5.0 ng/mL had <10% risk. CONCLUSION: We found that Gleason 6 FIR patients with cT2b to T2c tumors had a low risk of harboring higher grade or stage disease and would be reasonable AS candidates, whereas patients with PSA of 10 to 20 ng/mL had a high risk and might generally be poor AS candidates.

National Trends and Predictors of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is not recommended for low-risk prostate cancer because of its lack of benefit and potential for harm. We evaluated the incidence and predictors of ADT use in low-risk disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the National Cancer Database, we identified 197,957 patients with low-risk prostate cancer (Gleason score of 3 + 3 = 6, prostate-specific antigen level <10 ng/mL, and cT1-T2a) diagnosed from 2004 to 2012 with complete demographic and treatment information. We used multiple logistic regression to evaluate predictors of ADT use and Cox regression to examine its association with all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Overall ADT use decreased from 17.6% in 2004 to 3.5% in 2012. In 2012, 11.5% of low-risk brachytherapy patients and 7.6% of external beam radiation therapy patients received ADT. Among 82,352 irradiation-managed patients, predictors of ADT use included treatment in a community versus academic cancer program (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.50-1.71; P<.001; incidence, 14.0% vs 6.0% in 2012); treatment in the South (AOR, 1.51), Midwest (AOR, 1.81), or Northeast (AOR, 1.90) versus West (P<.001); and brachytherapy use versus external beam radiation therapy (AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.27-1.37; P<.001). Among 25,196 patients who did not receive local therapy, predictors of primary ADT use included a Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score of ≥2 versus 0 (AOR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.06-1.91; P=.018); treatment in a community versus academic cancer program (AOR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.37-1.90; P<.001); and treatment in the South (AOR, 1.26), Midwest (AOR, 1.52), or Northeast (AOR, 1.28) versus West (P≤.008). Primary ADT use was associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients who did not receive local therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14-1.43; P<.001) after adjustment for age and comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: ADT use in low-risk prostate cancer has declined nationally but may remain an issue of concern in certain populations and regions.

Low rates of androgen deprivation therapy use with salvage radiation therapy in patients with prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The RTOG 9601 and GETUG-AFU 16 randomized controlled trials demonstrated that the addition of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to salvage radiation therapy (SRT) improves progression-free and, for RTOG 9601, overall survival. We examined national trends in the use of ADT with SRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the 484,009 patients in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2012 with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), 4,200 men received SRT (≥6mo after surgery). We used Pearson's chi-squared test to evaluate changes in ADT use, and multiple logistic regression to examine predictors of ADT use. RESULTS: Overall, 32.1% of SRT patients received ADT, which increased after initial results of RTOG 9601 showed an improvement in metastasis-free survival in 2010 (28.5% in 2008/2009 vs. 34.5% in 2011/2012, P = 0.006). Predictors of ADT use include presurgery prostate-specific antigen>20ng/ml vs.<10ng/ml (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.34, P = 0.002; 36.7% vs. 29.6%); positive vs. negative margins (AOR = 1.29, P = 0.001; 34.9% vs. 27.8%); Gleason 3+4 (AOR = 1.53; 21.3%), Gleason 4+3 (AOR = 2.40; 32.0%), or Gleason 8 to 10 (AOR = 4.49; 49.2%) vs. Gleason 2 to 6 (P≤0.005 for all; 13.2%); and pathologic T3a (AOR = 1.46; 30.9%), T3b (AOR = 2.50; 47.6%), or T4 (AOR = 4.14; 60.9%) vs. T2 (P<0.001 for all; 19.1%). Starting SRT 12 to 23.9 months (AOR = 0.69; 23.2%) or≥24 months (AOR = 0.25; 8.0%) after RP was associated with decreased odds of ADT use vs. starting SRT 6 to 8.9 months after RP (P≤0.002 for both; 35.0%). CONCLUSION: Although less than one-third of SRT patients from the study era received ADT, there is evidence that physicians and patients have begun slowly adopting this practice with the 2010 reporting of a decrease in the cumulative incidence of metastases with the addition of ADT to SRT. Given the newly reported survival benefit of RTOG 9601, additional work will be necessary to identify which patients benefit the most from the use of ADT with SRT to individualize treatment.