Venture capital investment in urology, 2011 to mid-2021.

INTRODUCTION: To characterize venture capital (VC) investments in urology in the past decade that represent promising innovations in early-stage companies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of deals made between VC investors and urologic companies from January 1, 2011, through June 28, 2021, was conducted by using a financial database (PitchBook Platform, PitchBook Data Inc). Data on urologic company and investor names; company information and funding categories (surgical device, therapeutic device, drug discovery/pharmaceutical, and health care technology companies); and deal sizes (in US dollars) and dates were abstracted and aggregated. Descriptive and linear regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Urology-related VC funding fluctuated from 2011 through mid-2021, but no substantial change was observed in funding over time. In total, 191 distinct deals were made involving urologic companies, totaling $1.1 billion. The four largest funding categories together accounted for $848 million and comprised therapeutic devices ($373 million), surgical devices ($187 million), drug discovery/pharmaceuticals ($185 million), and health care technology ($102 million). At least $450 million (41% of total investments) was invested in companies developing minimally invasive surgical devices. CONCLUSIONS: Urologic VC investments did not increase in the past decade and were allocated more toward devices than pharmaceuticals or health care technology. Given relative patterns within urology, VC investments may shift toward health care technology and away from pharmaceuticals but remain stable for devices. Further investments in promising technologies may help urologists more effectively manage urologic disease while optimizing outcomes.

Promoting the use of the PI-QUAL score for prostate MRI quality: results from the ESOR Nicholas Gourtsoyiannis teaching fellowship.

OBJECTIVES: The Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score is a new metric to evaluate the diagnostic quality of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate. This study assesses the impact of an intervention, namely a prostate MRI quality training lecture, on the participant's ability to apply PI-QUAL. METHODS: Sixteen participants (radiologists, urologists, physicists, and computer scientists) of varying experience in reviewing diagnostic prostate MRI all assessed the image quality of ten examinations from different vendors and machines. Then, they attended a dedicated lecture followed by a hands-on workshop on MRI quality assessment using the PI-QUAL score. Five scans assessed by the participants were evaluated in the workshop using the PI-QUAL score for teaching purposes. After the course, the same participants evaluated the image quality of a new set of ten scans applying the PI-QUAL score. Results were assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis. The reference standard was the PI-QUAL score assessed by one of the developers of PI-QUAL. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in average area under the curve for the evaluation of image quality from baseline (0.59 [95 % confidence intervals: 0.50-0.66]) to post-teaching (0.96 [0.92-0.98]), an improvement of 0.37 [0.21-0.41] (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A teaching course (dedicated lecture + hands-on workshop) on PI-QUAL significantly improved the application of this scoring system to assess the quality of prostate MRI examinations. KEY POINTS: • A significant improvement in the application of PI-QUAL for the assessment of prostate MR image quality was observed after an educational intervention. • Appropriate training on image quality can be delivered to those involved in the acquisition and interpretation of prostate MRI. • Further investigation will be needed to understand the impact on improving the acquisition of high-quality diagnostic prostate MR examinations.

Optimal assessment of quality of life for patients with prostate cancer.

The burden of cancer and oncologic treatment is reflected not only through morbidity and mortality, but also through impacts on patient quality of life (QoL). However, QoL has not been historically measured or addressed with the same rigorous methodology as traditional disease-related outcomes such as overall survival and progression, as these are driven by objective measurements and events. Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most prevalent non-cutaneous cancers in men around the world. Both the cancer and its treatment significantly impact patients' physical, emotional, sexual, social, and overall QoL. Ensuring assessment and integration of QoL in research and clinical care enables improvement in treatment outcomes that matter most to patients while also facilitating alignment of healthcare priorities with reimbursements. Great strides toward this end have been made over the last decade, but significant room for improvement remains. To ensure high quality, reliable data collection, QoL assessment tools must be psychometrically validated, standardized, widely implemented across trials, and regularly assessed to allow internal and external validity, longitudinal comparative effectiveness research, and quality control. Additional consideration should be taken for instruments used to measure the aspects of QoL specific to minority, caregiver, and elderly populations. Open clinical questions include how providers should weight changes in different QoL subscales and how clinically meaningful difference thresholds should be defined. Review of ongoing clinical trials encouragingly reveals an increased focus on measuring and improving QoL for men with PCa which will inform the way we utilize QoL assessments. However, additional efforts herein described are needed to fully optimize these processes. In summary, this review will explain the rationale for QoL assessments in PCa populations, discuss requirements for effective implementation, describe considerations for vulnerable and under-evaluated populations, and summarize ongoing clinical trials assessing patient QoL.