A novel multiplex score to predict outcomes of partial nephrectomy for multiple tumors.

BACKGROUND: The RENAL nephrometry score (RNS) is widely used to describe renal mass complexity and inform patient counseling for partial nephrectomy (PN). However, in cases with multiple tumors, it is unknown which features drive perioperative outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To employ a novel scoring equation (multiplex score [MS]) derived from RNS to assess outcomes of multiplex PN at our institution. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 62 consecutive multiplex PN (median (range) # tumors = 4(2-11), 65% robotic) were performed by a single surgeon. The MS was defined a priori as a weighted score derived from RNS (# low risk ([LR] lesions) + 2*(# intermediate risk [IR]) + 4*(# high risk [HR]) based on published complication rates. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: MS was dichotomized into favorable/unfavorable based on median score. Patient outcomes were maintained prospectively. MS was compared with other potential RNS derived scoring systems. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: A total of 249 tumors were scored. Median (range) MS was 6(range 2-20, IQR 3-8). Complications occurred in 10 patients (16.1%). Only 1 complication occurred in the favorable MS(<6) group, and MS was associated with perioperative complication (P = 0.02) and blood loss (P < .001). When compared to other potential scoring systems, MS had the best area under the curve (AUC) to predict operative complications (0.75). CONCLUSIONS: The novel MS was associated with complications and blood loss. This tool may facilitate standardized reporting of complexity for multiplex series, with special relevance for hereditary cancer syndromes. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients who have one kidney tumor, there are established scoring systems to help patients and surgeons decide on the surgical plan. However currently, for patients with more than one renal tumor, there is no such scoring system. Here, we present the "Multiplex Score" to aid shared-decision-making in cases with more than one renal tumor.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsy in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The underlying premise of prostate cancer active surveillance (AS) is that cancers likely to metastasize will be recognized and eliminated before cancer-related disease can ensue. Our study was designed to determine the prostate cancer upgrading rate when biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging (MRGBx) is used before entry and during AS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort included 519 men with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer who enrolled in prospective studies (NCT00949819 and NCT00102544) between February 2008 and February 2020. Subjects were preliminarily diagnosed with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 cancer; AS began when subsequent MRGBx confirmed GG1 or GG2. Participants underwent confirmatory MRGBx (targeted and systematic) followed by surveillance MRGBx approximately every 12 to 24 months. The primary outcome was tumor upgrading to ≥GG3. RESULTS: Upgrading to ≥GG3 was found in 92 men after a median followup of 4.8 years (IQR 3.1-6.5) after confirmatory MRGBx. Upgrade-free probability after 5 years was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). Cancer detected in a magnetic resonance imaging lesion at confirmatory MRGBx increased risk of subsequent upgrading during AS (HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.3-6.0), as did presence of GG2 (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.1-8.2) In men who upgraded ≥GG3 during AS, upgrading was detected by targeted cores only in 27%, systematic cores only in 25% and both in 47%. In 63 men undergoing prostatectomy, upgrading from MRGBx was found in only 5 (8%). CONCLUSIONS: When AS begins and follows with MRGBx (targeted and systematic), upgrading rate (≥GG3) is greater when tumor is initially present within a magnetic resonance imaging lesion or when pathology is GG2 than when these features are absent.

Using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Scores to Select an Optimal Prostate Biopsy Method: A Secondary Analysis of the Trio Study.

BACKGROUND: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy (TBx) results in better prostate cancer (PCa) detection relative to systematic biopsy (SBx), the combination of both methods increases clinically significant PCa detection relative to either Bx method alone. However, combined Bx subjects patients to higher number of Bx cores and greater detection of clinically insignificant PCa. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prebiopsy prostate MRI can identify men who could forgo combined Bx without a substantial risk of missing clinically significant PCa (csPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Men with MRI-visible prostate lesions underwent combined TBx plus SBx. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcomes were detection rates for grade group (GG) ≥2 and GG ≥3 PCa by TBx and SBx, stratified by Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among PI-RADS 5 cases, nearly all csPCs were detected by TBx, as adding SBx resulted in detection of only 2.5% more GG ≥2 cancers. Among PI-RADS 3-4 cases, however, SBx addition resulted in detection of substantially more csPCs than TBx alone (8% vs 7.5%). Conversely, TBx added little to detection of csPC among men with PI-RADS 2 lesions (2%) relative to SBx (7.8%). CONCLUSIONS: While combined Bx increases the detection of csPC among men with MRI-visible prostate lesions, this benefit was largely restricted to PI-RADS 3-4 lesions. Using a strategy of TBx only for PI-RADS 5 and combined Bx only for PI-RADS 3-4 would avoid excess biopsies for men with PI-RADS 5 lesions while resulting in a low risk of missing csPC (1%). PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study investigated an optimized strategy to diagnose aggressive prostate cancer in men with an abnormal prostate MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scan while minimizing the risk of excess biopsies. We used a scoring system for MRI scan images called PI-RADS. The results show that MRI-targeted biopsies alone could be used for men with a PI-RADS score of 5, while men with a PI-RADS score of 3 or 4 would benefit from a combination of MRI-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00102544.

Why Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy Miss Clinically Significant Cancer?

PURPOSE: Multiple studies demonstrate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy detects more clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy; however, some clinically significant cancers are detected by systematic biopsy only. While these events are rare, we sought to perform a retrospective analysis of these cases to ascertain the reasons that MRI-targeted biopsy missed clinically significant cancer which was subsequently detected on systematic prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a prospective study comparing cancer detection rates by transrectal MRI-targeted fusion biopsy and systematic 12-core biopsy. Patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination, or imaging findings concerning for prostate cancer underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in the same setting. The subset of patients with grade group (GG) ≥3 cancer found on systematic biopsy and GG ≤2 cancer (or no cancer) on MRI-targeted biopsy was classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. A retrospective analysis of the MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy real-time screen captures determined the cause of MRI-targeted biopsy miss. Multivariable logistic regression analysis compared baseline characteristics of patients with MRI-targeted biopsy misses to GG-matched patients whose clinically significant cancer was detected by MRI-targeted biopsy. RESULTS: Over the study period of 2007 to 2019, 2,103 patients met study inclusion criteria and underwent combined MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsies. A total of 41 (1.9%) men were classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. Most MRI-targeted biopsy misses were due to errors in lesion targeting (21, 51.2%), followed by MRI-invisible lesions (17, 40.5%) and MRI lesions missed by the radiologist (3, 7.1%). On logistic regression analysis, lower Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSTM) score was associated with having clinically significant cancer missed on MRI-targeted biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: While uncommon, most MRI-targeted biopsy misses are due to errors in lesion targeting, which highlights the importance of accurate co-registration and targeting when using software-based fusion platforms. Additionally, some patients will harbor MRI-invisible lesions which are untargetable by MRI-targeted platforms. The presence of a low PI-RADS score despite a high PSA is suggestive of harboring an MRI-invisible lesion.

Emerging role for local therapy in oligometastatic prostate cancer.

Oligometastatic prostate cancer is a subtype of metastatic disease that generally is defined by the presence of 5 or fewer metastatic lesions. Metastatic prostate cancer currently is treated with androgen deprivation therapy and additional systemic therapy, such as novel antiandrogen medications or chemotherapy. The management of metastatic prostate cancer is evolving, however, with the notion that some patients with low-burden metastatic disease may benefit from both local and systemic therapy. Local therapy of the prostate in the setting of oligometastatic prostate cancer is a new concept. Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that cytoreductive therapy, including radical prostatectomy, can improve overall survival in these patients. Ongoing randomized trials are comparing cytoreductive therapy with standard-of-care treatment options. Local therapy in the form of radiation has also been investigated in phase 2 randomized trials. In this review, we discuss the biological and clinical rationales for local therapy, review the current evidence for local therapy, and compare the clinical designs of various ongoing trials.

The Risk of Prostate Cancer Progression in Active Surveillance Patients with Bilateral Disease Detected by Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Fusion and Systematic Biopsy.

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate whether bilateral prostate cancer detected at active surveillance (AS) enrollment is associated with progression to Grade Group (GG) ≥2 and to compare the efficacy of combined targeted biopsy plus systematic biopsy (Cbx) vs systematic biopsy (Sbx) or targeted biopsy alone to detect bilateral disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients referred to our institution from 2007-2020 was queried. The study cohort included all AS patients with GG1 on confirmatory Cbx and followup of at least 1 year. Cox proportional hazard analysis identified baseline characteristics associated with progression to ≥GG2 at any point throughout followup. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred, 103 patients had GG1 on Cbx and were included in the study; 49/103 (47.6%) patients progressed to ≥GG2, with 30/72 (41.7%) patients with unilateral disease progressing and 19/31 (61.3%) patients with bilateral disease progressing. Median time to progression was 68 months vs 52 months for unilateral and bilateral disease, respectively (p=0.006). Both prostate specific antigen density (HR 1.72, p=0.005) and presence of bilateral disease (HR 2.21, p=0.012) on confirmatory biopsy were associated with AS progression. At time of progression, GG and risk group were significantly higher in patients with bilateral versus unilateral disease. Cbx detected 16% more patients with bilateral disease than Sbx alone. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral disease and prostate specific antigen density at confirmatory Cbx conferred greater risk of earlier AS progression. Cbx was superior to Sbx for identifying bilateral disease. AS risk-stratification protocols may benefit from including presence of bilateral disease and should use Cbx to detect bilateral disease.

Reoperative Partial Nephrectomy-Does Previous Surgical Footprint Impact Outcomes?

PURPOSE: Historically, open techniques have been favored over minimally invasive approaches for complex surgeries. We aimed to identify differences in perioperative outcomes, surgical footprints, and complication rates in patients undergoing either open or robotic reoperative partial nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing reoperative partial nephrectomy was performed. Patients were assigned to cohorts based on current and prior surgical approaches: open after open, open after minimally invasive surgery, robotic after open, and robotic after minimally invasive surgery cohorts. Perioperative outcomes were compared among cohorts. Factors contributing to complications were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients underwent reoperative partial nephrectomy, including 103 in the open after open, 10 in the open after minimally invasive surgery, 47 in the robotic after open, and 32 in the robotic after minimally invasive surgery cohorts. The overall and major complication (grade ≥3) rates were 65% and 19%, respectively. The number of blood transfusions, overall complications, and major complications were significantly lower in robotic compared to open surgical cohorts. On multivariate analysis, the robotic approach was protective against major complications (OR 0.3, p=0.02) and estimated blood loss was predictive (OR 1.03, p=0.004). Prior surgical approach was not predictive for major complications. CONCLUSIONS: Reoperative partial nephrectomy is feasible using both open and robotic approaches. While the robotic approach was independently associated with fewer major complications, prior approach was not, implying that prior surgical approaches are less important to perioperative outcomes and in contributing to the overall surgical footprint.

Changes in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation Criteria to Detect Prostate Cancer Progression for Men on Active Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The ability of serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to capture pathologic progression during active surveillance (AS) remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in MRI are associated with pathologic progression for patients on AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From July 2007 through January 2020, we identified all patients evaluated for AS at our institution. Following confirmatory biopsy, a total of 391 patients who underwent surveillance MRI and biopsy at least once were identified (median follow-up of 35.6 mo, interquartile range 19.7-60.6). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All MRI intervals were scored using the "Prostate Cancer Radiologic Estimation of Change in Sequential Evaluation" (PRECISE) criteria, with PRECISE scores =4 considered a positive change in MRI. A generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression analysis was conducted for all intervals with a PRECISE score of <4 to determine the predictors of Gleason grade group (GG) progression despite stable MRI. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 621 MRI intervals were scored by PRECISE and validated by biopsy. The negative predictive value of stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) was greatest for detecting GG1 to?=?GG3 disease (0.94 [0.91-0.97]). If 2-yr surveillance biopsy were performed exclusively for a positive change in MRI, 3.7% (4/109) of avoided biopsies would have resulted in missed progression from GG1 to?=?GG3 disease. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (odds ratio 1.95 [1.17-3.25], p?=? 0.01) was a risk factor for progression from GG1 to =GG3 disease despite stable MRI. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with GG1 disease and stable MRI (PRECISE score <4) on surveillance, grade progression to?=?GG3 disease is not common. In patients with grade progression detected on biopsy despite stable MRI, elevated PSA density appeared to be a risk factor for progression to?=?GG3 disease. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance, the risk of progressing to grade group 3 disease is low with a stable magnetic resonance image (MRI) after 2?yr. Having higher prostate-specific antigen density increases the risk of progression, despite having a stable MRI.

Contemporary management of advanced prostate cancer: an evolving landscape.

Recent population-based studies suggest that the incidence of advanced and metastatic prostate cancer may be increasing. Concurrently with this apparent stage migration toward advanced disease, several major developments have occurred in the treatment paradigm for men with advanced prostate cancer. These include the US Food and Drug Administration approval of 8 novel agents over the last decade. In addition to novel pharmaceuticals, rapidly evolving diagnostic tools have emerged. This review provides a primer for clinicians who treat men with advanced prostate cancer, including medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and urologists.

Making a case "for" focal therapy of the prostate in intermediate risk prostate cancer: current perspective and ongoing trials.

Focal therapy is growing as an alternative management options for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Parallel to the increasing popularity of active surveillance (AS) as a treatment for low-risk disease, there has been an increased interest towards providing focal therapy for patients with intermediate-risk disease. Focal therapy can act as a logical "middle ground" in patients who seek treatment while minimizing potential side effects of definitive whole-gland treatment. The aim of the current review is to define the rationale of focal therapy in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and highlight the importance of patient selection in focal therapy candidacy.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted and Systematic Biopsy for Detection of Grade Progression in Patients on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance for patients with low and intermediate risk prostate cancers is becoming a more utilized option in recent years. However, the use of magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy for monitoring grade progression has been poorly studied in this population. We aim to define the utility of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy in an active surveillance population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and January 2020, patients with diagnosed prostate cancer who elected active surveillance were monitored with prostate magnetic resonance imaging, imaging-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy. Patients were eligible for surveillance if diagnosed with any volume Gleason grade 1 disease and select Gleason grade 2 disease. Grade progression (Gleason grade 1 to ≥2 disease and Gleason grade 2 to ≥3 disease) for each biopsy modality was measured at 2 years, 4 years and 6+ years. RESULTS: In total, 369 patients had both magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy and were surveilled for at least 1 year. At 2 years, systematic biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and combined biopsy (systematic+imaging-targeted) detected grade progression in 44 patients (15.9%), 73 patients (26.4%) and 90 patients (32.5%), respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected more cancer grade progression compared to systematic biopsy in both the low and intermediate risk populations (p <0.001). Of all 90 grade progressions at the 2-year time point 46 (51.1%) were found by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy alone and missed by systematic biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy detected significantly more grade progressions in our active surveillance cohort compared to systematic biopsy at 2 years. Our results provide compelling evidence that prostate magnetic resonance imaging and imaging-targeted biopsy should be included in contemporary active surveillance protocols.

Metastasectomy for rectal wall seeding of prostate adenocarcinoma after transrectal prostate biopsy.

Definitive treatment for local prostate cancer recurrence remains controversial. Early recurrences are often from positive surgical margins or nodal metastases, however other explanations should be considered. We present a case of a 79 year-old male with localized prostate cancer and early biochemical persistence after margin-negative robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Workup demonstrated a 0.9 cm rectal mass without nodal or distant metastasis, and biopsy revealed prostate adenocarcinoma. A subsequent transanal excision was performed. Post-operatively, his PSA dropped to 0.02 ng/mL. We present a rare case of prostate adenocarcinoma seeding after transrectal prostate biopsy and a review of the literature.

PI-RADS® Category as a Predictor of Progression to Unfavorable Risk Prostate Cancer in Men on Active Surveillance.

PURPOSE: We identified baseline imaging and clinical characteristics of patients that may improve risk stratification among patients being evaluated for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020 patients referred to our institution for prostate cancer were evaluated and those who remained on active surveillance were identified. Men underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging upon entry into our active surveillance protocol during which baseline demographic and imaging data were documented. Patients were then followed and outcomes, specifically progression to Gleason Grade Group (GG)3 or greater disease, were recorded. RESULTS: Of the men placed on active surveillance 344 had at least 1 PI-RADS score documented. For those with an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, 33% (17/51) had progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance with a median time to progression of 31 months. When comparing the progression-free survival times and progression rates in each category, PI-RADS category was found to be associated with progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance (p <0.01). On univariable analysis factors associated with progression included an index lesion PI-RADS category of 5, prostate specific antigen density and the size of the largest lesion. On multivariable analysis only PI-RADS category of 5 and prostate specific antigen density were associated with progression on active surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: PI-RADS lesion categories at baseline multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging during active surveillance enrollment can be used to predict cancer progression to GG3 or greater on active surveillance. This information, along with other clinical data, can better assist urologists in identifying and managing patients appropriate for active surveillance.

Combined MRI-targeted Plus Systematic Confirmatory Biopsy Improves Risk Stratification for Patients Enrolling on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of combined MRI-targeted plus systematic 12-core biopsy (Cbx) to aid in the selection of patients for active surveillance (AS). METHODS: From July 2007 to January 2020, patients with Gleason Grade Group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer were referred to our center for AS consideration. All patients underwent an MRI and confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy (Cbx), and AS outcomes based on Cbx results were compared. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of AS failure, defined as progression to ≥ GG3 disease on follow-up biopsies. RESULTS: Of 579 patients referred for AS, 79.3% (459/579) and 20.7% (120/579) had an initial diagnosis of GG1 and GG2 disease, respectively. Overall, 43.2% of patients (250/579) were upgraded on confirmatory Cbx, with 19.2% (111/579) upgraded to ≥ GG3. For the 226 patients followed on AS, 32.7% (74/226) had benign, 45.6% (103/226) had GG1, and 21.7% (49/226) had GG2 results on confirmatory Cbx. In total, 28.8% (65/226) of patients eventually progressed to ≥ GG3, with a median time to AS failure of 89 months. The median time from confirmatory Cbx to AS failure for the negative, GG1, and GG2 groups were 97, 97, and 32 months, respectively (p < .001). On multivariable regression, only age (hazard ratio 1.06 [1.02-1.11], p < .005) and GG on confirmatory Cbx (hazard ratio 2.75 [1.78-4.26], p < .005) remained as positive predictors of AS failure. CONCLUSION: The confirmatory combined MRI-targeted plus systematic biopsy provides useful information for the risk stratification of patients at the time of AS enrollment.

Focal therapy for prostate cancer: recent advances and future directions.

Prostate cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in men after skin cancer. Owing to the rising popularity of prostate-specific antigen screening, large numbers of patients are receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer and undergoing whole-gland treatment. Some patients with a diagnosis of low-risk, localized disease may not benefit from whole-gland treatment, however, given its known morbidity. In response to advances in prostate imaging and evidence suggesting that the prognosis in prostate cancer is related to the index lesion, many patients have begun to opt for focal therapy, which targets a lesion rather than the entire prostate. This "middle ground" of therapy, between active surveillance and whole-gland treatment, is appealing to patients because the risk for side effects is believed to be lower with focal therapy than with whole-gland treatment. This review discusses the oncologic rationale for focal therapy in localized prostate cancer, examines the major therapy modalities, and addresses future directions.

Use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in localized prostate cancer.

Introduction: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is commonly used for localized disease mainly to detect intraprostatic lesions and to guide biopsies. Despite its documented success in clinical practice, limitations still exist for prostate MRI. In this review, we discuss common clinical uses of prostate MRI, its limitations, and potential solutions for those limitations.Areas covered: Current uses of prostate MRI and challenges discussed. Literature search in PubMed was completed using the keywords "prostate MRI, prostate cancer."Expert opinion: Prostate MRI is a useful method for localization, biopsy, and treatment guidance of prostate cancer. Certain limitations of prostate MRI such as false negatives due to spatial resolution and relatively low repeatability between different radiologists can potentially be solved by investing more on education training and artificial intelligence technology.

MRI-guided pelvic lymph node biopsy via transrectal approach in prostate cancer.

Lymph node assessment in prostate cancer is most commonly performed at the time of radical prostatectomy. We present the case of pre-operative pelvic lymph node sampling with the use of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at the time of prostate biopsy. Lymph node pathology revealed metastatic, poorly differentiated prostate cancer, concurrent with Gleason 4 + 5 disease showing perineural invasion. The use of MRI fusion guided biopsy for nodal sampling may be an effective method pre-operative staging and treatment planning for prostate adenocarcinoma.

Utilization of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin for Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer in an Era of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin Supply Shortages.

OBJECTIVES: To study trends in Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) utilization for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) before and during national BCG shortages. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with localized NMIBC. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with BCG use. Temporal trends in BCG use were studied using segmented regression analysis. RESULTS: We identified 238,279 patients with NMIBC from 2004 to 2015. Overall, 33,660 (14.1%) patients with NMIBC received intravesical BCG during the study period. Segmented regression revealed a slower rate of rise of BCG utilization following major supply interruptions in 2011 and 2012 (2004-2012: +0.62% increase per year [P < .0001]; 2013-2015: +0.29% increase per year [P = .084]). This trend was most pronounced in Ta-low grade patients and least pronounced in T1-high grade patients. CONCLUSIONS: BCG utilization for NMIBC increased significantly over the study period, possibly representing increased adoption of national guidelines for BCG in NMIBC. In the years following interruptions in BCG supply, BCG use appears to have been rationed based on clinical risk, with the steepest declines in BCG use occurring in the lowest risk patients.

Robotic cold ischemia achieves comparable functional outcomes to open cold ischemia during partial nephrectomy for complex kidney tumors.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes after open and robotic partial nephrectomy performed with cold ischemia. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was completed of consecutive patients who underwent partial nephrectomy with renal hypothermia between January 2011 and September 2016. The study cohort included both open (Open Cold Ischemia, OCI; n=170) and robotic (Robotic Cold Ischemia, RCI; n=31) patients with complex renal masses (R.E.N.A.L. score >7) who did not meet exclusion criteria. A modified intracorporeal technique 1 was utilized for the introduction of ice slush at the time of hilar clamping in the RCI group. Statistical testing was performed to compare key perioperative and functional outcomes after ensuring equilibration of both groups by clinicodemographic criteria. RESULTS: Both groups were statistically equivalent with respect to baseline characteristics. Median GFR preservation postoperatively was 86.7% for the open group and 86.6% in the robotic group (p=0.49). Cold ischemia time (CIT) in the open group was 35 minutes compared to 28 minutes (p = 0.03) in the robotic group. LOS was significantly shorter by 2 days (p < 0.01) in the robotic group. Positive margins was noted to be 17 (10%) in the open group and 2 (6.5%) patients in the robotic group (p=0.48). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate an effective and simplified method of intracorporeal ice cooling during robotic partial nephrectomy. Our data suggests that results with this approach compare favorably to open cold ischemia technique. Intracorporeal ice cooling can be considered when performing complex partial nephrectomies with ischemia times expected to exceed 25 minutes.

Contemporary management of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Kidney cancer is the eighth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States, and nearly one-third of patients have locally advanced or metastatic disease at presentation. Historically, survival outcomes for patients with advanced disease have been poor. In recent years, several novel targeted agents have emerged for the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma that have changed treatment paradigms. At the same time, surgical therapy continues to have a critical role in the management of selected patients. Recent medical and surgical advances have improved the prognosis for patients with a diagnosis of advanced disease. This review provides an overview of the current treatment landscape for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.