Time from biopsy to radical prostatectomy by race in an equal-access healthcare system: Results from the SEARCH cohort.

BACKGROUND: We previously showed that within an equal-access health system, race was not associated with the time between prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis and radical prostatectomy (RP). However, in the more recent time-period of the study (2003-2007), Black men had significantly longer times to RP. We sought to revisit the question in a larger study population with more contemporary patients. We hypothesized that time from diagnosis to treatment would not differ by race, even after accounting for active surveillance (AS) and the exclusion of men at very low to low risk of PC progression. METHODS: We analyzed data from 5885 men undergoing RP from 1988 to 2017 at eight Veterans Affairs Hospitals from SEARCH. Multiple linear regression was used to compare time from biopsy to RP and to examine the risk of delays (>90 and >180 days) between races. In sensitivity analyses we excluded men deemed to have initially chosen AS based on having >365 days from biopsy to RP and men at very low to low PC risk for progression according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines. RESULTS: At biopsy, Black men (n = 1959) were younger, had lower body mass index, and higher prostate specific antigen levels, (all p < 0.02), compared to White men (n = 3926). Time from biopsy to RP was longer in Black men (mean days: 98 vs. 92; adjusted ratio of mean number of days, 1.07 [95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.11], p < 0.001); however, there were no differences in delays >90 or >180 days after adjusting for confounders (all p ≥ 0.286). Results were similar following the exclusion of men potentially under on AS and at very low and low risk. CONCLUSIONS: In an equal-access healthcare system, we did not find evidence of clinically relevant differences in time from biopsy to RP in Black versus White men.

Adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma: post hoc analysis from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) E2805.

OBJECTIVES: To study the effects of adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) enrolled in the randomised phase III clinical trial E2805. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The original trial (E2805) was a randomised, double-blinded phase III clinical trial comparing outcomes in 1943 patients with RCC accrued between 2006 and 2010 and treated with up to 1 year of adjuvant placebo, sunitinib, or sorafenib. The present study analyses the cohort of patients with sRCC that participated in E2805. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients (8.8%) had sarcomatoid features. Of these, 52 patients received sunitinib, 58 received sorafenib, and 61 received placebo. Most patients were pT3-4 (71.1%, 63.7%, and 70.5%, respectively); 17.3%, 19.0%, and 27.9% had pathologically positive lymph nodes; and 59.6%, 62.1%, and 62.3% of the patients were University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Integrated Staging System (UISS) very-high risk. In 49% of patients with subsequent development of metastatic disease, recurrence occurred in the lung, followed by 30% in the lymph nodes, and 13% in the liver. There was a high local recurrence rate in the renal bed (16%, 29%, and 18%, respectively). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 33.6%, 36.0%, and 27.8%, for sunitinib, sorafenib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.20 for sunitinib vs placebo, and HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.53-1.28 for sorafenib vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with sunitinib or sorafenib did not show an improvement in DFS or OS in patients with sRCC.

Implementing Continuous Quality Improvement in an Integrated Community Urology Practice: Lessons Learned.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of 2 different continuous quality improvement interventions in an integrated community urology practice. We specifically assessed the impact of audited physician feedback on improving physicians' adoption of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer (CaP) and adherence to a prostate biopsy time-out intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The electronic medical records of Genesis Healthcare Partners were analyzed between August 24, 2011 and September 30, 2020 to evaluate the performance of 2 quality interventions: audited physician feedback to improve active surveillance adoption in low-risk CaP patients, and audited physician feedback to promote adherence to an electronic medical records embedded prostate biopsy time-out template. Physician and Genesis Healthcare Partners group adherence to each quality initiative was compared before and after each intervention type using ANOVA testing. RESULTS: For active surveillance, we consistently saw an increase in active surveillance adoption for low risk CaP patients in association with continuous audited feedback (P < .001). Adherence to the prostate biopsy time-out template improved when audited feedback was provided (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The implementation of clinical guidelines into routine clinical practice remains challenging and poses an obstacle to the improvement of United States healthcare quality. Continuous quality improvement should be a dynamic process, and in our experience, audited feedback coupled with education is most effective.

Development and Validation of a Clinical Prognostic Stage Group System for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Using Disease-Specific Mortality Results From the International Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate.

Importance: In 2016, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) established criteria to evaluate prediction models for staging. No localized prostate cancer models were endorsed by the Precision Medicine Core committee, and 8th edition staging was based on expert consensus. Objective: To develop and validate a pretreatment clinical prognostic stage group system for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multinational cohort study included 7 centers from the United States, Canada, and Europe, the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Veterans Affairs Medical Centers collaborative (5 centers), and the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry (43 centers) (the STAR-CAP cohort). Patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2013 (follow-up completed December 31, 2017). The STAR-CAP cohort was randomly divided into training and validation data sets; statisticians were blinded to the validation data until the model was locked. A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort was used as a second validation set. Analysis was performed from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019. Exposures: Curative intent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Based on a competing-risk regression model, a points-based Score staging system was developed. Model discrimination (C index), calibration, and overall performance were assessed in the validation cohorts. Results: Of 19 684 patients included in the analysis (median age, 64.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-70.0] years), 12 421 were treated with RP and 7263 with radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 71.8 (IQR, 34.3-124.3) months; 4078 (20.7%) were followed up for at least 10 years. Age, T category, N category, Gleason grade, pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, and the percentage of positive core biopsy results among biopsies performed were included as variables. In the validation set, predicted 10-year PCSM for the 9 Score groups ranged from 0.3% to 40.0%. The 10-year C index (0.796; 95% CI, 0.760-0.828) exceeded that of the AJCC 8th edition (0.757; 95% CI, 0.719-0.792), which was improved across age, race, and treatment modality and within the SEER validation cohort. The Score system performed similarly to individualized random survival forest and interaction models and outperformed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk grouping 3- and 4-tier classification systems (10-year C index for NCCN 3-tier, 0.729; for NCCN 4-tier, 0.746; for Score, 0.794) as well as CAPRA (10-year C index for CAPRA, 0.760; for Score, 0.782). Conclusions and Relevance: Using a large, diverse international cohort treated with standard curative treatment options, a proposed AJCC-compliant clinical prognostic stage group system for prostate cancer has been developed. This system may allow consistency of reporting and interpretation of results and clinical trial design.

Performance of clinicopathologic models in men with high risk localized prostate cancer: impact of a 22-gene genomic classifier.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer exhibits biological and clinical heterogeneity even within established clinico-pathologic risk groups. The Decipher genomic classifier (GC) is a validated method to further risk-stratify disease in patients with prostate cancer, but its performance solely within National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high-risk disease has not been undertaken to date. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective study of 405 men with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent primary treatment with radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) at 11 centers from 1995 to 2005 was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the hazard ratios (HR) for the development of metastatic disease based on clinico-pathologic variables, risk groups, and GC score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was determined for regression models without and with the GC score. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 82 months, 104 patients (26%) developed metastatic disease. On univariable analysis, increasing GC score was significantly associated with metastatic disease ([HR]: 1.34 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-1.50, p < 0.001), while age, serum PSA, biopsy GG, and clinical T-stage were not (all p > 0.05). On multivariable analysis, GC score (HR: 1.33 per 0.1 unit increase, 95% CI: 1.19-1.48, p < 0.001) and GC high-risk (vs low-risk, HR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.79-4.87, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with metastasis. The addition of GC score to regression models based on NCCN risk group improved model AUC from 0.46 to 0.67, and CAPRA from 0.59 to 0.71. CONCLUSIONS: Among men with high-risk prostate cancer, conventional clinico-pathologic data had poor discrimination to risk stratify development of metastatic disease. GC score was a significant and independent predictor of metastasis and may help identify men best suited for treatment intensification/de-escalation.

Development and Validation of a Novel Integrated Clinical-Genomic Risk Group Classification for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Purpose It is clinically challenging to integrate genomic-classifier results that report a numeric risk of recurrence into treatment recommendations for localized prostate cancer, which are founded in the framework of risk groups. We aimed to develop a novel clinical-genomic risk grouping system that can readily be incorporated into treatment guidelines for localized prostate cancer. Materials and Methods Two multicenter cohorts (n = 991) were used for training and validation of the clinical-genomic risk groups, and two additional cohorts (n = 5,937) were used for reclassification analyses. Competing risks analysis was used to estimate the risk of distant metastasis. Time-dependent c-indices were constructed to compare clinicopathologic risk models with the clinical-genomic risk groups. Results With a median follow-up of 8 years for patients in the training cohort, 10-year distant metastasis rates for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low, favorable-intermediate, unfavorable-intermediate, and high-risk were 7.3%, 9.2%, 38.0%, and 39.5%, respectively. In contrast, the three-tier clinical-genomic risk groups had 10-year distant metastasis rates of 3.5%, 29.4%, and 54.6%, for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk, respectively, which were consistent in the validation cohort (0%, 25.9%, and 55.2%, respectively). C-indices for the clinical-genomic risk grouping system (0.84; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93) were improved over NCCN (0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.86) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.84), and 30% of patients using NCCN low/intermediate/high would be reclassified by the new three-tier system and 67% of patients would be reclassified from NCCN six-tier (very-low- to very-high-risk) by the new six-tier system. Conclusion A commercially available genomic classifier in combination with standard clinicopathologic variables can generate a simple-to-use clinical-genomic risk grouping that more accurately identifies patients at low, intermediate, and high risk for metastasis and can be easily incorporated into current guidelines to better risk-stratify patients.

Magnetically responsive microbubbles as delivery vehicles for targeted sonodynamic and antimetabolite therapy of pancreatic cancer.

Magnetically responsive microbubbles (MagMBs), consisting of an oxygen gas core and a phospholipid coating functionalised with Rose Bengal (RB) and/or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), were assessed as a delivery vehicle for the targeted treatment of pancreatic cancer using combined antimetabolite and sonodynamic therapy (SDT). MagMBs delivering the combined 5-FU/SDT treatment produced a reduction in cell viability of over 50% when tested against a panel of four pancreatic cancer cell lines in vitro. Intravenous administration of the MagMBs to mice bearing orthotopic human xenograft BxPC-3 tumours yielded a 48.3% reduction in tumour volume relative to an untreated control group (p<0.05) when the tumour was exposed to both external magnetic and ultrasound fields during administration of the MagMBs. In contrast, application of an external ultrasound field alone resulted in a 27% reduction in tumour volume. In addition, activated caspase and BAX protein levels were both observed to be significantly elevated in tumours harvested from animals treated with the MagMBs in the presence of magnetic and ultrasonic fields when compared to expression of those proteins in tumours from either the control or ultrasound field only groups (p<0.05). These results suggest MagMBs have considerable potential as a platform to enable the targeted delivery of combined sonodynamic/antimetabolite therapy in pancreatic cancer.

Ability of a Genomic Classifier to Predict Metastasis and Prostate Cancer-specific Mortality after Radiation or Surgery based on Needle Biopsy Specimens.

BACKGROUND: Decipher is a validated genomic classifier developed to determine the biological potential for metastasis after radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of biopsy Decipher to predict metastasis and Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) in primarily intermediate- to high-risk patients treated with RP or radiation therapy (RT). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and thirty-five patients treated with either RP (n=105) or RT±androgen deprivation therapy (n=130) with available genomic expression profiles generated from diagnostic biopsy specimens from seven tertiary referral centers. The highest-grade core was sampled and Decipher was calculated based on a locked random forest model. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Metastasis and PCSM were the primary and secondary outcomes of the study, respectively. Cox analysis and c-index were used to evaluate the performance of Decipher. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: With a median follow-up of 6 yr among censored patients, 34 patients developed metastases and 11 died of prostate cancer. On multivariable analysis, biopsy Decipher remained a significant predictor of metastasis (hazard ratio: 1.37 per 10% increase in score, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.78, p=0.018) after adjusting for clinical variables. For predicting metastasis 5-yr post-biopsy, Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score had a c-index of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.50-0.69), while Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.82). National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk group had a c-index of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53-0.77), while National Comprehensive Cancer Network plus biopsy Decipher had a c-index of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.66-0.82). Biopsy Decipher was a significant predictor of PCSM (hazard ratio: 1.57 per 10% increase in score, 95% CI: 1.03-2.48, p=0.037), with a 5-yr PCSM rate of 0%, 0%, and 9.4% for Decipher low, intermediate, and high, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and PCSM from diagnostic biopsy specimens of primarily intermediate- and high-risk men treated with first-line RT or RP. PATIENT SUMMARY: Biopsy Decipher predicted metastasis and prostate cancer-specific mortality risk from diagnostic biopsy specimens.

Number of Unfavorable Intermediate-Risk Factors Predicts Pathologic Upstaging and Prostate Cancer-Specific Mortality Following Radical Prostatectomy: Results From the SEARCH Database.

BACKGROUND: To validate and further improve the stratification of intermediate risk prostate cancer into favorable and unfavorable subgroups for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The SEARCH database was queried for IR patients undergoing radical prostatectomy without adjuvant radiotherapy. UIR disease was defined any patient with at least one unfavorable risk factor (URF), including primary Gleason pattern 4, 50% of more biopsy cores containing cancer, or multiple National Comprehensive Cancer Network IR factors. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred eighty-six patients with IR prostate cancer comprised the study cohort. Median follow-up was 62 months. Patients classified as UIR were significantly more likely to have pathologic high-risk features, such as Gleason score 8 - 10, pT3-4 disease, or lymph node metastases, than FIR patients (P < 0.001). Furthermore, UIR patients had significantly higher rates of PSA-relapse (PSA, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.89, P < 0.001) and distant metastasis (DM, HR = 2.92, P = 0.001), but no difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) or all-cause mortality in multivariable analysis. On secondary analysis, patients with ≥2 URF had significantly worse PSA-RFS, DM, and PCSM than those with 0 or 1 URF. Moreover, 40% of patients with ≥2 URF had high-risk pathologic features. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with UIR prostate cancer are at increased risk of PSA relapse, DM, and pathologic upstaging following prostatectomy. However, increased risk of PCSM was only detected in those with ≥2 URF. This suggests that further refinement of the UIR subgroup may improve risk stratification. Prostate Prostate 77:154-163, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer in a Community Practice: How to Measure, Manage, and Improve?

OBJECTIVE: To measure past active surveillance (AS) adoption rates, institute the best practice, and measure the AS adoption rates following implementation. We report our findings over a 3-year period. METHODS: Patient prostate needle biopsy and treatment data from the period August 2011 to August 2014 were retrieved from an integrated electronic medical records (Allscripts) and stored in a Microsoft Access database for analysis. Structured data were queried using the automated software program WizMD and unstructured data were abstracted by manual review. AS adoption was calculated according to four different selection criteria. Between 2013 and 2014, physicians at Genesis Healthcare Partners (GHP) underwent an educational training program on the University of California, San Diego/GHP AS best practice for managing low-risk prostate cancer patients and were provided report cards on their AS adoption and comparative reporting. RESULTS: AS adoption increased for the 3 years of the study. AS adoption for all newly diagnosed patients managed at GHP increased from 12.9% to 14.74%. AS adoption for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network) increased from 31.90% to 58.46% from year 1 to year 3 of the study (P < .001), and AS adoption for the most strict (restrictive) criteria increased from 43.75% to 82.61% (P < .001) after the educational and comparative reporting intervention. CONCLUSION: These data highlight the potential benefit of physician education and comparative reporting to enhance AS adoption. AS adoption rates vary according to selection criteria used for analysis. Carefully selected outcomes from evidence-based guidelines have the potential to enhance medical quality.

Phosphatase Inhibitors Function as Novel, Broad Spectrum Botulinum Neurotoxin Antagonists in Mouse and Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Motor Neuron-Based Assays.

There is an urgent need to develop novel treatments to counter Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) poisoning. Currently, the majority of BoNT drug development efforts focus on directly inhibiting the proteolytic components of BoNT, i.e. light chains (LC). Although this is a rational approach, previous research has shown that LCs are extremely difficult drug targets and that inhibiting multi-serotype BoNTs with a single LC inhibitor may not be feasible. An alternative approach would target neuronal pathways involved in intoxication/recovery, rather than the LC itself. Phosphorylation-related mechanisms have been implicated in the intoxication pathway(s) of BoNTs. However, the effects of phosphatase inhibitors upon BoNT activity in the physiological target of BoNTs, i.e. motor neurons, have not been investigated. In this study, a small library of phosphatase inhibitors was screened for BoNT antagonism in the context of mouse embryonic stem cell-derived motor neurons (ES-MNs). Four inhibitors were found to function as BoNT/A antagonists. Subsequently, we confirmed that these inhibitors protect against BoNT/A in a dose-dependent manner in human ES-MNs. Additionally, these compounds provide protection when administered in post-intoxication scenario. Importantly, the inhibitors were also effective against BoNT serotypes B and E. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study showing phosphatase inhibitors as broad-spectrum BoNT antagonists.

Effects of Adjuvant Sorafenib and Sunitinib on Cardiac Function in Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients without Overt Metastases: Results from ASSURE, ECOG 2805.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib and sorafenib are used widely in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These agents are associated with a significant incidence of cardiovascular (CV) dysfunction and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) declines, observed largely in the metastatic setting. However, in the adjuvant population, the CV effects of these agents remain unknown. We prospectively defined the incidence of cardiotoxicity among resected, high-risk RCC patients treated with these agents. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo was administered for up to 12 months in patients with high-risk, resected RCC. LVEF was measured by multigated acquisition (MUGA) scans at standard intervals. Additional CV adverse events were reported according to NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). RESULTS: Among 1,943 patients randomized, 1,599 had at least 1 post-baseline MUGA. Within 6 months, 21 patients (1.3%) experienced a cardiac event, defined as an LVEF decline from baseline that was >15% and below the institutional lower limit of normal. Nine of 513 patients (1.8%) were on sunitinib, 7 of 508 (1.4%) on sorafenib, and 5 of 578 (0.9%) on placebo (P = 0.28 and 0.56 comparing sunitinib and sorafenib to placebo, respectively). With dose interruption or adjustment, 16 of the 21 recovered their LVEF to >50%. The incidence of symptomatic heart failure, arrhythmia, or myocardial ischemia did not differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the adjuvant setting, we prospectively define low incidence of cardiotoxicity with sunitinib and sorafenib. These findings may be related to close CV monitoring, or potentially to fewer CV comorbidities in our nonmetastatic population.

Is clinical stage T2c prostate cancer an intermediate- or high-risk disease?

BACKGROUND: Clinical stage T2c (cT2c) is an indeterminate factor in prostate cancer (PC) risk stratification. According to the D'Amico grouping and American Urological Association guidelines, cT2c is a high risk, whereas the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Urological Association classify cT2c as an intermediate risk. This study assessed whether cT2c tumors without other high-risk factors (clinical stage T2c, not otherwise specified [cT2c-NOS]) behaved as an intermediate or high risk through an analysis of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Two thousand seven hundred fifty-nine men from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Database and 12,900 men from Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) from 1988-2011 and 1982-2012, respectively, were analyzed. Patients were grouped into low-risk (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] < 10 ng/mL, Gleason sum ≤ 6, and cT1-T2a), intermediate-risk (PSA = 10-20 ng/mL, Gleason sum = 7, or cT2b), and high-risk PC categories (PSA > 20 ng/mL, Gleason sum = 8-10, or cT3). Men with cT2c tumors who were not otherwise at high risk (ie, PSA< 20 ng/mL and Gleason sum < 8) were placed into a separate category termed cT2c-NOS. Associations between cT2c-NOS and intermediate- and high-risk patients and BCR were tested with the log-rank test and Cox proportional analysis models. RESULTS: Ninety-nine men (4%) from SEARCH and 202 men (2%) from JHH had tumors classified as cT2c-NOS. The cT2c-NOS patients had a BCR risk similar to that of the intermediate-risk patients (SEARCH, P = .27; JHH, P = .23) but a significantly lower BCR risk in comparison with the high-risk patients (SEARCH, P < .001; JHH, P < .001). When they were specifically compared with intermediate- and high-risk patients, after adjustments for year and center, cT2c-NOS patients had outcomes comparable to those of intermediate-risk patients (SEARCH, P = .53; JHH, P = .54) but significantly better than those of high-risk patients (SEARCH, P = .003; JHH, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cT2c disease without other high-risk features had outcomes similar to the outcomes of patients with intermediate-risk PC and significantly better than the outcomes of patients with high-risk PC. These findings suggest that men with cT2c disease should be considered to be at intermediate risk.

What is the Incidence of Kidney Stones after Chemotherapy in Patients with Lymphoproliferative or Myeloproliferative Disorders?

Introduction This study describes the incidence and risk factors of de novo nephrolithiasis among patients with lymphoproliferative or myeloproliferative diseases who have undergone chemotherapy. Materials and Methods From 2001 to 2011, patients with lymphoproliferative or myeloproliferative disorders treated with chemotherapy were retrospectively identified. The incidence of image proven nephrolithiasis after chemotherapy was determined. Demographic and clinical variables were recorded. Patients with a history of nephrolithiasis prior to chemotherapy were excluded. The primary outcome was incidence of nephrolithiasis, and secondary outcomes were risk factors predictive of de novo stone. Comparative statistics were used to compare demographic and disease specific variables for patients who developed de novo stones versus those who did not. Results A total of 1,316 patients were identified and the incidence of de novo nephrolithiasis was 5.5% (72/1316; symptomatic stones 1.8% 24/1316). Among patients with nephrolithiasis, 72.2% had lymphoproliferative disorders, 27.8% had myeloproliferative disorders, and 25% utilized allopurinol. The median urinary pH was 5.5, and the mean serum uric acid, calcium, potassium and phosphorus levels were 7.5, 9.6, 4.3, and 3.8 mg/dL, respectively. In univariate analysis, mean uric acid (p=0.013), calcium (p<0.001)), and potassium (p=0.039) levels were higher in stone formers. Diabetes mellitus (p<0.001), hypertension (p=0.003), and hyperlipidemia (p<0.001) were more common in stone formers. In multivariate analysis, diabetes mellitus, hyperuricemia, and hypercalcemia predicted stone. Conclusions We report the incidence of de novo nephrolithiasis in patients who have undergone chemotherapy. Diabetes mellitus, hyperuricemia, and hypercalcemia are patient-specific risk factors that increase the odds of developing an upper tract stone following chemotherapy. .

High serum folate is associated with reduced biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: results from the SEARCH Database.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze the association between serum levels of folate and risk of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy among men from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 135 subjects from the SEARCH database treated between 1991-2009 with available preoperative serum folate levels. Patients' characteristics at the time of the surgery were analyzed with ranksum and linear regression. Uni- and multivariable analyses of folate levels (log-transformed) and time to biochemical recurrence were performed with Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: The median preoperative folate level was 11.6 ng/mL (reference = 1.5-20.0 ng/mL). Folate levels were significantly lower among African-American men than Caucasians (P = 0.003). In univariable analysis, higher folate levels were associated with more recent year of surgery (P < 0.001) and lower preoperative PSA (P = 0.003). In univariable analysis, there was a trend towards lower risk of biochemical recurrence among men with high folate levels (HR = 0.61, 95 %CI = 0.37-1.03, P = 0.064). After adjustments for patients characteristics' and pre- and post-operative clinical and pathological findings, higher serum levels of folate were independently associated with lower risk for biochemical recurrence (HR = 0.42, 95 %CI = 0.20-0.89, P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: In a cohort of men undergoing radical prostatectomy at several VAs across the country, higher serum folate levels were associated with lower PSA and lower risk for biochemical failure. While the source of the folate in the serum in this study is unknown (i.e. diet vs. supplement), these findings, if confirmed, suggest a potential role of folic acid supplementation or increased consumption of folate rich foods to reduce the risk of recurrence.

High serum folate is associated with reduced biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy: Results from the SEARCH Database

Introduction To analyze the association between serum levels of folate and risk of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy among men from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database. Materials and Methods Retrospective analysis of 135 subjects from the SEARCH database treated between 1991-2009 with available preoperative serum folate levels. Patients' characteristics at the time of the surgery were analyzed with ranksum and linear regression. Uni- and multivariable analyses of folate levels (log-transformed) and time to biochemical recurrence were performed with Cox proportional hazards. Results The median preoperative folate level was 11.6ng/mL (reference = 1.5-20.0ng/mL). Folate levels were significantly lower among African-American men than Caucasians (P = 0.003). In univariable analysis, higher folate levels were associated with more recent year of surgery (P < 0.001) and lower preoperative PSA (P = 0.003). In univariable analysis, there was a trend towards lower risk of biochemical recurrence among men with high folate levels (HR = 0.61, 95%CI = 0.37-1.03, P = 0.064). After adjustments for patients characteristics' and pre- and post-operative clinical and pathological findings, higher serum levels of folate were independently associated with lower risk for biochemical recurrence (HR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.20-0.89, P = 0.023). Conclusion In a cohort of men undergoing radical prostatectomy at several VAs across the country, higher serum folate levels were associated with lower PSA and lower risk for biochemical failure. While the source of the folate in the serum in this study is unknown (i.e. diet vs. supplement), these findings, if confirmed, suggest a potential role of folic acid supplementation or increased consumption of folate rich foods to reduce the risk of recurrence. .

Does timing of cytoreductive nephrectomy impact patient survival with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the tyrosine kinase inhibitor era? A multi-institutional study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who underwent primary cytoreductive nephrectomy (CRN), followed by adjuvant sunitinib therapy, vs those who underwent primary sunitinib therapy before planned CRN. METHODS: This was a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 35 mRCC patients from June 2005 to August 2009 (median follow-up, 28.5 months): 17 underwent primary CRN, followed by adjuvant sunitinib (group 1); 18 underwent primary sunitinib therapy, followed by planned CRN (group 2). Response to therapy was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Group 2 patients who had partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) proceeded to CRN (group 2 +CRN). Group 2 patients who progressed were treated with salvage systemic therapy (group 2 no-CRN). Primary and secondary outcomes were disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patient demographic and tumor characteristics were similar. The groups had similar rates of DSS and OS on univariate analysis (P = .318 and P = .181). In group 2, 11 (61%) had PR/DS; 7 (39%) progressed. Mean times to disease-specific death in group 1, group 2 (+CRN), and group 2 (no-CRN) were 29.2, 4.6, and 28.7 months, respectively (P = .025). Kaplan-Meier analysis of DSS and OS demonstrated significant improvement in group 2 (+CRN) vs group 1 vs group 2 (no-CRN; P <.001), which remained significant on multivariate regression. CONCLUSION: Nonresponders to primary sunitinib therapy had a poor prognosis. Offering CRN, if safely feasible, combined with sunitinib, was associated with improved disease-specific outcome in mRCC. Responders to primary sunitinib who underwent CRN had better DSS and OS than patients who underwent primary CRN, followed by sunitinib. Further investigation is required to assess the role, timing, and sequencing of targeted therapy and CRN in treatment of mRCC.

Does the evidence for an inverse relationship between serum vitamin D status and breast cancer risk satisfy the Hill criteria?

A wide range of epidemiologic and laboratory studies combined provide compelling evidence of a protective role of vitamin D on risk of breast cancer. This review evaluates the scientific evidence for such a role in the context of the A.B. Hill criteria for causality, in order to assess the presence of a causal, inverse relationship, between vitamin D status and breast cancer risk. After evaluation of this evidence in the context of Hill's criteria, it was found that the criteria for a causal relationship were largely satisfied. Studies in human populations and the laboratory have consistently demonstrated that vitamin D plays an important role in the prevention of breast cancer. Vitamin D supplementation is an urgently needed, low cost, effective, and safe intervention strategy for breast cancer prevention that should be implemented without delay. In the meantime, randomized controlled trials of high doses of vitamin D(3) for prevention of breast cancer should be undertaken to provide the necessary evidence to guide national health policy.