Predictive factors of diagnostic delay and effect on treatment patterns in testicular germ cell tumor patients.

BACKGROUND: Increased time from clinical symptom onset to diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumor (GCT), termed diagnostic delay (DD), is associated with an increased likelihood of metastatic disease at presentation. We assessed the association of patient factors on DD and subsequent treatment patterns. METHODS: The records for patients undergoing orchiectomy at a tertiary care hospital and safety net county hospital between 2006 and 2018 were obtained. Demographic variables, clinical symptoms, and post-diagnosis parameters were queried. Patient factors were assessed for association with DD by using both univariate and multivariable analyses. The effect of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) on DD was also studied. RESULTS: 201 patients received orchiectomy, and median DD was 38 days (IQR 14.5-122.5). Patients with metastatic disease had increased DD compared to those with localized disease (76 vs. 31 days, P < 0.001). Increased DD was associated with presentation to the safety net hospital (P = 0.001), non-white (P = 0.025), emergency department presentation (P = 0.025), uninsured (P = 0.01), testicular pain (P = 0.019), and presentation before 2014 (P = 0.047). DD was independently associated with presentation before 2014 (P = 0.004) on multivariate analysis. DD >38 days (i.e., above the median) was associated with increased receipt of adjuvant therapy (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: PPACA implementation is associated with earlier detection of testicular cancer. Our findings highlight the impact of health care legislation on improving access of care to young men with cancer. Delay in diagnosis can lead to increased stage at presentation and need for adjuvant treatment. Further research to identify and overcome sociodemographic factors associated with diagnostic delay may lead to decreased treatment-related morbidity.

The early impact of medicaid expansion on urologic malignancies in the United States.

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of variable adoption of Medicaid Expansion (ME) of the Affordable Care Act among different states on urologic malignancies using a new variable that defines ME status of patient's residence in a nationwide cancer registry. BASIC PROCEDURES: The National Cancer Database was queried for urologic malignancies (bladder, prostate, kidney and testis) from 2011 to 2016, spanning the period surrounding the primary ME which took place in 2014. Trends in insurance status at time of diagnosis and effects on stage at presentation and survival after ME were evaluated using a difference-in-differences estimator and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression model. MAIN FINDINGS: The percentage of patients with Medicaid coverage at the time of diagnosis increased significantly after adoption of ME in ME states across all urologic malignancies. Concurrently, there was a significant decrease in percentage of uninsured patients diagnosed with testis cancer, but not other urologic malignancies, in ME states. A change in the stage at presentation was not observed across all urologic malignancies for patients in ME states after adoption of ME. No difference in overall survival was noted among patients living in a ME state compared to non-ME states with adoption of ME in 2014. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Despite increases in the proportion of patients with Medicaid coverage after 2014 in states that enrolled in ME, there was not an associated change in stage at presentation or survival for patients with genitourinary malignancy.

Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment.

PURPOSE: Optimization of prostate biopsy requires addressing the shortcomings of standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy, including false-negative rates, incorrect risk stratification, detection of clinically insignificant disease and the need for repeat biopsy. Magnetic resonance imaging is an evolving noninvasive imaging modality that increases the accurate localization of prostate cancer at the time of biopsy, and thereby enhances clinical risk assessment and improves the ability to appropriately counsel patients regarding therapy. In this review we 1) summarize the various sequences that comprise a prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging examination along with its performance characteristics in cancer detection, localization and reporting standards; 2) evaluate potential applications of magnetic resonance imaging targeting in prostate biopsy among men with no previous biopsy, a negative previous biopsy and those with low stage cancer; and 3) describe the techniques of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy and comparative study outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bibliographic search covering the period up to October 2013 was conducted using MEDLINE®/PubMed®. Articles were reviewed and categorized based on which of the 3 objectives of this review was addressed. Data were extracted, analyzed and summarized. RESULTS: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging consists of anatomical T2-weighted imaging coupled with at least 2 functional imaging techniques. It has demonstrated improved prostate cancer detection sensitivity up to 80% in the peripheral zone and 81% in the transition zone. A prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score has been developed, and is depicted using the Likert or PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) scale for better standardization of magnetic resonance imaging interpretation and reporting. Among men with no previous biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging increases the frequency of significant cancer detection to 50% in low risk and 71% in high risk patients. In low risk men the negative predictive value of a combination of negative magnetic resonance imaging with prostate volume parameters is nearly 98%, suggesting a potential role in avoiding biopsy and reducing over detection/overtreatment. Among men with a previous negative biopsy 72% to 87% of cancers detected by magnetic resonance imaging guidance are clinically significant. Among men with a known low risk cancer, repeat biopsy using magnetic resonance targeting demonstrates a high likelihood of confirming low risk disease in low suspicion score lesions and of upgrading in high suspicion score lesions. Techniques of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy include visual estimation transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy; software co-registered magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy; and in-bore magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Although the improvement in accuracy and efficiency of visual estimation biopsy compared to systematic appears limited, co-registered magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound biopsy as well as in-bore magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy appear to increase cancer detection rates in conjunction with increasing suspicion score. CONCLUSIONS: Use of magnetic resonance imaging for targeting prostate biopsies has the potential to reduce the sampling error associated with conventional biopsy by providing better disease localization and sampling. More accurate risk stratification through improved cancer sampling may impact therapeutic decision making. Optimal clinical application of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy remains under investigation.