A randomized patient education trial investigating treatment-related distress and satisfaction with the use of an at-home gynecologic brachytherapy educational video.

BACKGROUND: Physician explanation of gynecologic brachytherapy can be overwhelming or induce patient anxiety, and may be time-constrained given clinical limitations. We report the first randomized trial of an educational video intervention in gynecologic brachytherapy on patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Between February 2020 and January 2022, 80 gynecologic cancer patients prescribed brachytherapy were randomly assigned to either standard informed consent (Arm A) or a supplemental 16 min brachytherapy educational video (https://vimeo.com/403385455/d0716e3cc8) via the internet (Arm B). Primary outcome was treatment-related distress (National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) distress scale scored 0 (no distress) to 10 (maximum distress)). Secondary outcome was patient satisfaction (summated Likert-scale scored 11-55). Surveys were administered at baseline, after first treatment, and prior to brachytherapy completion. RESULTS: All patients completed the prescribed brachytherapy. In Arm B, 19/40 (48%) patients and 10/40 (25%) patients' family/friends viewed the video. For patients that completed all surveys (Arm A n=29, Arm B n=28), there was no difference between arms in the sociodemographic, clinical, or treatment variables. Distress scores were low at baseline (Arm A median 4, Arm B median 4, p=0.65) and there was no detectable change in distress between arms on surveys 1 and 2 (ß 0.36, p=0.67) or surveys 1 and 3 (ß -1.02, p=0.29) in multivariable analysis. Satisfaction scores were high at baseline (Arm A median 54, Arm B median 54.5, p=0.64) and there was no detectable change in satisfaction between arms on surveys 1 and 2 (ß 0.22, p=0.93) or surveys 1 and 3 (ß 0.63, p=0.85) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients randomized to an educational video tool for gynecologic brachytherapy, approximately 50% of the cohort and 25% of the cohort's family/friends used the video. Overall, patients had low distress scores and high satisfaction scores with no significant differences between the standard and video intervention arms. Further work is needed to understand factors contributing to gynecologic brachytherapy anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04363957.

Active surveillance for intermediate-risk prostate cancer in African American and non-Hispanic White men.

BACKGROUND: The safety of active surveillance (AS) for African American men compared with non-Hispanic White (White) men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer is unclear. METHODS: The authors identified patients with modified National Comprehensive Cancer Network favorable ("low-intermediate") and unfavorable ("high-intermediate") intermediate-risk prostate cancer diagnosed between 2001 and 2015 and initially managed with AS in the Veterans Health Administration database. They analyzed definitive treatment, disease progression, metastases, prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), and all-cause mortality by using cumulative incidences and multivariable competing-risks (disease progression, metastasis, and PCSM) or Cox (all-cause mortality) regression. RESULTS: The cohort included 1007 men (African Americans, 330 [32.8%]; Whites, 677 [67.2%]) followed for a median of 7.7 years; 773 (76.8%) had low-intermediate-risk disease, and 234 (23.2%) had high-intermediate-risk disease. The 10-year cumulative incidences of definitive treatment were not significantly different (African Americans, 83.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 78.5%-88.7%; Whites, 80.6%; 95% CI, 76.6%-84.4%; P = .17). Among those with low-intermediate-risk disease, there were no significant differences in the 10-year cumulative incidences of disease progression (African Americans, 46.8%; 95% CI, 40.0%-53.3%; Whites, 46.9%; 95% CI, 42.1%-51.5%; P = .91), metastasis (African Americans, 7.1%; 95% CI, 3.7%-11.8%; Whites, 10.8%; 95% CI, 7.6%-14.6%; P = .17), or PCSM (African Americans, 3.8%; 95% CI, 1.6%-7.5%; Whites, 3.8%; 95% CI, 2.0%-6.3%; P = .69). In a multivariable regression including the entire cohort, African American race was not associated with increased risks of definitive treatment, disease progression, metastasis, PCSM, or all-cause mortality (all P > .30). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in the Veterans Affairs Health System were similar for African American and White men treated for low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer with AS.

Preoperative Risk Score for Predicting Incomplete Cytoreduction: A 12-Institution Study from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: For patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing cytoreductive surgery with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC), incomplete cytoreduction (CCR2/3) confers morbidity without survival benefit. The aim of this study is to identify preoperative factors which predict CCR2/3. METHODS: All patients who underwent curative-intent CRS/HIPEC of low/high-grade appendiceal, colorectal, or peritoneal mesothelioma cancers in the 12-institution US HIPEC Collaborative from 2000 to 2017 were included (n = 2027). The primary aim is to create an incomplete-cytoreduction risk score (ICRS) to predict CCR2/3 CRS utilizing preoperative data. ICRS was created from a randomly selected cohort of 50% of patients (derivation cohort) and verified on the remaining patients (validation cohort). RESULTS: Within our derivation cohort (n = 998), histology was low-grade appendiceal neoplasms in 30%, high-grade appendiceal tumor in 41%, colorectal tumor in 22%, and peritoneal mesothelioma in 8%. CCR0/1 was achieved in 816 patients and CCR 2/3 in 116 patients. On multivariable analysis, preoperative factors associated with incomplete cytoreduction were male gender [odds ratio (OR) 3.4, p = 0.007], presence of ascites (OR 2.8, p = 0.028), cancer antigen (CA)-125 ≥ 40 U/mL (OR 3.4, p = 0.012), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≥ 4.2 ng/mL (OR 3.2, p = 0.029). Each preoperative factor was assigned a score of 0 or 1 to form an ICRS from 0 to 4. Scores were grouped as zero (0), low (1-2), or high (3-4). Incidence of CCR2/3 progressively increased by risk group from 1.6% in zero to 13% in low and 39% in high. When ICRS was applied to the validation cohort (n = 1029), this relationship was maintained. CONCLUSION: The incomplete cytoreduction risk score incorporates preoperative factors to accurately stratify the risk of CCR2/3 resection in CRS/HIPEC. This score should not be used in isolation, however, to exclude patients from surgery.

Optimal Surveillance Frequency After CRS/HIPEC for Appendiceal and Colorectal Neoplasms: A Multi-institutional Analysis of the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: No guidelines exist for surveillance following cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for appendiceal and colorectal cancer. The primary objective was to define the optimal surveillance frequency after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: The U.S. HIPEC Collaborative database (2000-2017) was reviewed for patients who underwent a CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer. Radiologic surveillance frequency was divided into two categories: low-frequency surveillance (LFS) at q6-12mos or high-frequency surveillance (HFS) at q2-4mos. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 975 patients, the median age was 55 year, 41% were male: 31% had non-invasive appendiceal (n = 301), 45% invasive appendiceal (n = 435), and 24% colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 239). With a median follow-up time of 25 mos, the median time to recurrence was 12 mos. Despite less surveillance, LFS patients had no decrease in median OS (non-invasive appendiceal: 106 vs. 65 mos, p < 0.01; invasive appendiceal: 120 vs. 73 mos, p = 0.02; colorectal cancer [CRC]: 35 vs. 30 mos, p = 0.8). LFS patients had lower median PCI scores compared with HFS (non-invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 19; invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 14; CRC: 8 vs. 11; all p < 0.01). However, on multivariable analysis, accounting for PCI score, LFS was still not associated with decreased OS for any histologic type (non-invasive appendiceal: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, p = 0.1; invasive appendiceal: HR: 0.73, p = 0.42; CRC: HR: 1.14, p = 0.59). When estimating annual incident cases of CRS/HIPEC at 375 for non-invasive appendiceal, 375 invasive appendiceal and 4410 colorectal, LFS compared with HFS for the initial two post-operative years would potentially save $13-19 M/year to the U.S. healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: Low-frequency surveillance after CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer is not associated with decreased survival, and when considering decreased costs, may optimize resource utilization.

Primary Tumor Sidedness is Predictive of Survival in Colon Cancer Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery With or Without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A US HIPEC Collaborative Study.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical relevance of primary tumor sidedness is not fully understood in colon cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a multi-institutional database of patients with peritoneal surface malignancy at 12 participating high-volume academic centers from the US HIPEC Collaborative. RESULTS: Overall, 336 patients with colon primary tumors who underwent curative-intent CRS with or without HIPEC were identified; 179 (53.3%) patients had right-sided primary tumors and 157 (46.7%) had left-sided primary tumors. Patients with right-sided tumors were more likely to be older, male, have higher Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI), and have a perforated primary tumor, but were less likely to have extraperitoneal disease. Patients with complete cytoreduction (CC-0/1) had a median disease-free survival (DFS) of 11.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6-15.3) versus 13.1 months (95% CI 9.5-16.8) [p = 0.158] and median overall survival (OS) of 30 months (95% CI 23.5-36.6) versus 45.4 months (95% CI 35.9-54.8) [p = 0.028] for right- and left-sided tumors; respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that right-sided primary tumor was an independent predictor of worse DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.75, 95% CI 1.19-2.56; p =0.004) and OS (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.09-2.73; p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Right-sided primary tumor was an independent predictor of worse DFS and OS. Relevant clinicopathologic criteria, such as tumor sidedness and PCI, should be considered in patient selection for CRS with or without HIPEC, and guide stratification for clinical trials.