The University of North Carolina Cancer Survivorship Cohort: A resource for collaborative survivorship research.

BACKGROUND: Rapid growth in the number of U.S. cancer survivors drives the need for ongoing research efforts to improve outcomes and experiences after cancer. Here we describe the University of North Carolina (UNC) Cancer Survivorship Cohort, a medical center-based cohort of adults with cancer that integrates medical record-abstracted cancer information, patient-reported outcomes, and biologic specimens. METHODS: Participants ages 18+ were recruited from UNC oncology clinics between April 2010 and August 2016. After enrollment, participants completed questionnaires on a range of topics including demographics, health history, health care access and utilization, quality of life, and symptoms. Blood samples and tumor tissue specimens were collected and processed by study staff, and cancer characteristics and other clinical data were abstracted from electronic medical records. Participants consented to recontact for future studies and linkage of their data with other data resources. RESULTS: In total, 3,999 participants with a cancer diagnosis were enrolled in the cohort. The most common cancer types among those enrolled included breast (N=866), uterine (N=458), colorectal (N=300), prostate (N=296), and head and neck (N=248). Blood specimens were collected for 3,027 (76%). Additional participants without cancer (N=1,299) were also enrolled, and the majority (62%) provided biospecimen samples. CONCLUSIONS: We encourage wide collaboration with investigators across institutions seeking to advance research in cancer survivorship. Procedures are in place to support proposals for use of existing or linked data and for proposals that require participant recontact or analysis of biospecimens. IMPACT: The UNC Cancer Survivorship Cohort is a unique resource for cancer survivorship research.

Decisional Conflict Among Patients Newly Diagnosed With Clinical T1 Renal Masses: A Prospective Study.

PURPOSE: Because multiple management options exist for clinical T1 renal masses, patients may experience a state of uncertainty about the course of action to pursue (ie, decisional conflict). To better support patients, we examined patient, clinical, and decision-making factors associated with decisional conflict among patients newly diagnosed with clinical T1 renal masses suspicious for kidney cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a prospective clinical trial, participants completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), scored 0 to 100 with < 25 associated with implementing decisions, at 2 time points during the initial decision-making period. The trial further characterized patient demographics, health status, tumor burden, and patient-centered communication, while a subcohort completed additional questionnaires on decision-making. Associations of patient, clinical, and decision-making factors with DCS scores were evaluated using generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures per patient. RESULTS: Of 274 enrollees, 250 completed a DCS survey; 74% had masses ≤ 4 cm in size, while 11% had high-complexity tumors. Model-based estimated mean DCS score across both time points was 17.6 (95% CI 16.0-19.3), though 50% reported a DCS score ≥ 25 at least once. On multivariable analysis, DCS scores increased with age (+2.64, 95% CI 1.04-4.23), high- vs low-complexity tumors (+6.50, 95% CI 0.35-12.65), and cystic vs solid masses (+9.78, 95% CI 5.27-14.28). Among decision-making factors, DCS scores decreased with higher self-efficacy (-3.31, 95% CI -5.77 to -0.86]) and information-seeking behavior (-4.44, 95% CI -7.32 to -1.56). DCS scores decreased with higher patient-centered communication scores (-8.89, 95% CI -11.85 to -5.94). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to patient and clinical factors, decision-making factors and patient-centered communication relate with decisional conflict, highlighting potential avenues to better support patient decision-making for clinical T1 renal masses.

Clinical Decision Support for Surgery: A Mixed Methods Study on Design and Implementation Perspectives From Urologists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess urologist attitudes toward clinical decision support (CDS) embedded into the electronic health record (EHR) and define design needs to facilitate implementation and impact. With recent advances in big data and artificial intelligence (AI), enthusiasm for personalized, data-driven tools to improve surgical decision-making has grown, but the impact of current tools remains limited. METHODS: A sequential explanatory mixed methods study from 2019 to 2020 was performed. First, survey responses from the 2019 American Urological Association Annual Census evaluated attitudes toward an automatic CDS tool that would display risk/benefit data. This was followed by the purposeful sampling of 25 urologists and qualitative interviews assessing perspectives on CDS impact and design needs. Bivariable, multivariable, and coding-based thematic analysis were applied and integrated. RESULTS: Among a weighted sample of 12,366 practicing urologists, the majority agreed CDS would help decision-making (70.9%, 95% CI 68.7%-73.2%), aid patient counseling (78.5%, 95% CI 76.5%-80.5%), save time (58.1%, 95% CI 55.7%-60.5%), and improve patient outcomes (42.9%, 95% CI 40.5%-45.4%). More years in practice was negatively associated with agreement (P <.001). Urologists described how CDS could bolster evidence-based care, personalized medicine, resource utilization, and patient experience. They also identified multiple implementation barriers and provided suggestions on form, functionality, and visual design to improve usefulness and ease of use. CONCLUSION: Urologists have favorable attitudes toward the potential for clinical decision support in the EHR. Smart design will be critical to ensure effective implementation and impact.

Feasibility, Acceptability, and Outcomes of a Mobile Health Tool for Radical Cystectomy Recovery.

PURPOSE: Postoperative education and symptom tracking are essential following cystectomy to reduce readmission rates and information overload. To address these issues, an internet-based tool was developed to provide education, alerts, and symptom tracking. We aimed to evaluate the tool's feasibility, acceptability, and impact on complication and readmission rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three eligible patients over 18 years old scheduled for cystectomy were enrolled. Patients were asked to use the mobile health (mHealth) tool daily for the first 2 weeks, then less frequently up to 90 days after discharge. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize study variables. Feasibility was defined as at least 50% of patients using the tool once a week, and acceptability as patient satisfaction of > 75%. RESULTS: Use of the mHealth tool was feasible, with 90% of patients using it 1 week after discharge, but engagement declined over time to 50%, with technological difficulties being the main reason for nonengagement. Patient and provider acceptability was high, with satisfaction > 90%. Within 90 days, 36% experienced complications after discharge and 30% were readmitted. Engagement with the mHealth application varied but was not statistically associated with readmission (P = .21). CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that the electronic mobile health intervention for patients undergoing cystectomy was feasible, acceptable, and provided valuable educational content and symptom management. Future larger studies are needed to determine the tool's effectiveness in improving patient outcomes and its potential implementation into routine clinical care.

Perceived vs Actual Shared Decision-Making Behavior Among Urologists: A Convergent, Parallel, Mixed-Methods Study of Self-Reported Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between self-perceived use of shared decision-making among urologists with use of validated prediction tools and self-described surgical decision-making. METHODS: This is a convergent mixed methods study of these parallel data from two modules (Shared Decision Making and Validated Prediction tools) within the 2019 American Urological Association (AUA) Annual Census. The shared decision-making (SDM) module queried aspects of SDM that urologists regularly used. The validated prediction tools module queried whether urologists regularly used, trusted, and found prediction tools helpful. Selected respondents to the 2019 AUA Annual Census underwent qualitative interviews on their surgical decision-making. RESULTS: In the weight sampled of 12,312 practicing urologists, most (77%) reported routine use of SDM, whereas only 30% noted regular use of validated prediction tools. On multivariable analysis, users of prediction tools were not associated with regular SDM use (31% vs 28%, P = .006) though was associated with use of decision aids f (32% vs 26%, P < .001). Shared decision-making emerged thematically with respect to matching treatment options, prioritizing goals, and navigating challenging decisions. However, the six specific components of shared decision-making ranged in their mentions within qualitative interviews. CONCLUSION: Most urologists report performing SDM as supported by its thematic presence in surgical decision-making. However, only a minority use validated prediction tools and urologists infrequently mention specific SDM components. This discrepancy provides an opportunity to explore how urologists perform SDM and can be used to support integrated strategies to implement SDM more effectively in clinical practice.

Linguistic Differences Based on Gender and Race in Urology Application Personal Statements: A Comparison of 2017 and 2023 Applications.

While diversity and inclusion efforts have increased in urology, comparative analysis of personal statements from 2016-2017 and 2022-2023 residency applications showed few linguistic changes over time by gender or race/ethnicity. These results suggest the need for directed efforts to engage, mentor, and coach females and underrepresented minorities during medical school and the urology application process.

Exposure and Reactions to Cancer Treatment Misinformation and Advice: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment misinformation, or false claims about alternative cures, often spreads faster and farther than true information on social media. Cancer treatment misinformation can harm the psychosocial and physical health of individuals with cancer and their cancer care networks by causing distress and encouraging people to abandon support, potentially leading to deviations from evidence-based care. There is a pressing need to understand how cancer treatment misinformation is shared and uncover ways to reduce misinformation. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to better understand exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation, including the willingness of study participants to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share Instagram posts with cancer treatment misinformation. METHODS: We conducted a survey on cancer treatment misinformation among US adults in December 2021. Participants reported their exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation generally (saw or heard, source, type of advice, and curiosity) and specifically on social media (platform, believability). Participants were then randomly assigned to view 1 of 3 cancer treatment misinformation posts or an information post and asked to report their willingness to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share. RESULTS: Among US adult participants (N=603; mean age 46, SD 18.83 years), including those with cancer and cancer caregivers, almost 1 in 4 (142/603, 23.5%) received advice about alternative ways to treat or cure cancer. Advice was primarily shared through family (39.4%) and friends (37.3%) for digestive (30.3%) and natural (14.1%) alternative cancer treatments, which generated curiosity among most recipients (106/142, 74.6%). More than half of participants (337/603, 55.9%) saw any cancer treatment misinformation on social media, with significantly higher exposure for those with cancer (53/109, 70.6%) than for those without cancer (89/494, 52.6%; P<.001). Participants saw cancer misinformation on Facebook (39.8%), YouTube (27%), Instagram (22.1%), and TikTok (14.1%), among other platforms. Participants (429/603, 71.1%) thought cancer treatment misinformation was true, at least sometimes, on social media. More than half (357/603, 59.2%) were likely to share any cancer misinformation posts shown. Many participants (412/603, 68.3%) were willing to prosocially intervene for any cancer misinformation posts, including flagging the cancer treatment misinformation posts as false (49.7%-51.4%) or reporting them to the platform (48.1%-51.4%). Among the participants, individuals with cancer and those who identified as Black or Hispanic reported greater willingness to intervene to reduce cancer misinformation but also higher intentions to share misinformation. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer treatment misinformation reaches US adults through social media, including on widely used platforms for support. Many believe that social media posts about alternative cancer treatment are true at least some of the time. The willingness of US adults, including those with cancer and members of susceptible populations, to prosocially intervene could initiate the necessary community action to reduce cancer treatment misinformation if coupled with strategies to help individuals discern false claims.

Patterns of multispecialty care for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer in the use of active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary models of care have been advocated for prostate cancer (PC) to promote shared decision-making and facilitate quality care. Yet, how this model applies to low-risk disease where the preferred management is expectant remains unclear. Accordingly, we examined recent practice patterns in specialty visits for low/intermediate-risk PC and resultant use of active surveillance (AS). METHODS: Using SEER-Medicare, we ascertained whether patients saw urology and radiation oncology (i.e., multispecialty care) versus urology alone, based on self-designated specialty codes, for newly diagnosed PC from 2010 to 2017. We also examined the association with AS, defined as the absence of treatment within 12 months of diagnosis. Time trends were analyzed using Cochran-Armitage test. Chi-squared and logistic regression analyses were applied to compare sociodemographic and clinicopathologic characteristics between these models of care. RESULTS: The proportion of patients seeing both specialists was 35.5% and 46.5% for low- and intermediate-risk patients respectively. Trend analysis showed a decline in multispecialty care in low-risk patients (44.1% to 25.3% years 2010-2017; P < 0.001). Between 2010 and 2017, the use of AS increased 40.9% to 68.6% (P < 0.001) and 13.1% to 24.6% (P < 0.001) for patients seeing urology and those seeing both specialists respectively. Age, urban residence, higher education, SEER region, co-morbidities, frailty, Gleason score, predicted receipt of multispecialty care (all P < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of AS among men with low-risk PC has occurred primarily under the purview of urologists. While selection is certainly at play, these data suggest that multispecialty care may not be required to promote the utilization of AS for men with low-risk PC.

Use of expectant management based on prostate cancer risk and health status: How far are we from a risk-adapted approach?

OBJECTIVES: While active surveillance, a form of expectant management (EM), is preferred for patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), some favor a more risk-adapted approach that recognizes patient preferences and condition-specific factors. However, previous research has shown non-patient-related factors often drive PCa treatment. In this context, we characterized trends in AS with respect to disease risk and health status. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using SEER-Medicare data, we identified men 66 years and older diagnosed with localized low- and intermediate-risk PCa from 2008 to 2017 and examined receipt of EM, defined as the absence of treatment (i.e., surgery, cryotherapy, radiation, chemotherapy, and androgen deprivation therapies) within 1 year of diagnosis. We performed bivariable analysis to compare trends in use for EM vs. treatment, stratified by disease risk (i.e., Gleason 3+3, 3+4, 4+3; PSA<10, 10-20) and health status (i.e., NCI Comorbidity Index (NCI), frailty, life expectancy). We then ran a multivariable logistic regression model to examine determinants of EM. RESULTS: Within this cohort, 26,364 (38%) were categorized as low-risk (i.e., Gleason 3+3 and PSA<10) and 43,520 (62%) as intermediate-risk (i.e., all others). Over the study period, use of EM significantly increased across all risk groups, except for Gleason 4+3 (P = 0.662), as well across all health status groups. However, linear trends did not differ significantly between frail vs. nonfrail patients for both those categorized as low-risk (P = 0.446) and intermediate-risk (P = 0.208). Trends also did not differ between NCI 0 vs. 1 vs. >1 for low-risk PCa (P = 0.395). In the multivariable models, EM was associated with increasing age and being frail for men with both low- and intermediate risk disease. Conversely, EM selection was negatively associated with higher comorbidity score. CONCLUSIONS: EM increased significantly over time for patients with low- and favorable intermediate-risk disease, with the most notable differences based on age and Gleason score. In contrast, trends in uptake of EM did not differ substantively by health status, suggesting that physicians may not be effectively incorporating patient health into PCa treatment decisions. Additional work is needed to develop interventions that recognize health status as an essential component of a risk-adapted approach.

Electronic Health Record Use and Perceptions among Urologic Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: Electronic health records (EHRs) have become widely adopted with increasing emphasis on improving care delivery. Improvements in surgery may be limited by specialty-specific issues that impact EHR usability and engagement. Accordingly, we examined EHR use and perceptions in urology, a diverse surgical specialty. METHODS: We conducted a national, sequential explanatory mixed methods study. Through the 2019 American Urological Association Census, we surveyed urologic surgeons on EHR use and perceptions and then identified associated characteristics through bivariable and multivariable analyses. Using purposeful sampling, we interviewed 25 urologists and applied coding-based thematic analysis, which was then integrated with survey findings. RESULTS: Among 2,159 practicing urologic surgeons, 2,081 (96.4%) reported using an EHR. In the weighted sample (n = 12,366), over 90% used the EHR for charting, viewing results, and order entry with most using information exchange functions (59.0-79.6%). In contrast, only 35.8% felt the EHR increases clinical efficiency, whereas 43.1% agreed it improves patient care, which related thematically to information management, administrative burden, patient safety, and patient-surgeon interaction. Quantitatively and qualitatively, use and perceptions differed by years in practice and practice type with more use and better perceptions among more recent entrants into the urologic workforce and those in academic/multispecialty practices, who may have earlier EHR exposure, better infrastructure, and more support. CONCLUSION: Despite wide and substantive usage, EHRs engender mixed feelings, especially among longer-practicing surgeons and those in lower-resourced settings (e.g., smaller and private practices). Beyond reducing administrative burden and simplifying information management, efforts to improve care delivery through the EHR should focus on surgeon engagement, particularly in the community, to boost implementation and user experience.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion in genitourinary clinical trials leading to FDA novel drug approval: An assessment of the FDA center for drug evaluation and research drug trials snapshot.

To determine the distribution of race and ethnicity among genitourinary oncology trial participants leading to FDA approval of novel molecular entities/biologics. Secondarily, we evaluated whether the proportion of Black participants in clinical trials increased over time. We quired the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Drug Trials Snapshot (DTS) between 2015 and 2020 for urologic oncology clinical trials leading to FDA approval of novel drugs. Enrollment data was stratified by race and ethnicity. Cochran-Armitage Trend tests were used to examine changes in Black patient participation over years. Nine clinical trials were identified that led to FDA approval of 5 novel molecular entities for prostate and 4 molecular entities for urothelial carcinoma treatment. Trials for prostate cancer included 5202 participants of which 69.8% were White, 4.0% Black, 11.0% Asian, 3.6% Hispanic, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 3% other. Trials in urothelial carcinoma had 704 participants of which 75.1% were male, 80.8% White, 2.3% Black, 2.4% Hispanic, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 5% other. Black participation rates over time did not change for urothelial (P = 0.59) or the combined cancer cohort (P = 0.29). Prostate cancer enrollment trends among Black participant declined over time (P = 0.03). Participants in genitourinary clinical trials leading to FDA approval of novel drugs are overwhelmingly white. Involving stakeholders who represent the needs and interests of underrepresented populations in the design and implementation of clinical trials of novel agents may be a strategy to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion among genitourinary clinical trials.

Testis Cancer Care in North Carolina: Implications for Real-World Evidence and Cancer Surveillance.

INTRODUCTION: Contemporary testis cancer management requires fastidious adherence to clinical guidelines and care principles, especially for those pursuing active surveillance (AS). However, real-world testis cancer care remains largely undescribed. Accordingly, we sought to assess the rigor of evaluation and monitoring among men with testis cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using North Carolina Central Cancer Registry data linked to insurance claims, we selected adult males diagnosed with primary testis cancer from 2003 to 2013. After identifying demographics, care setting, histology, stage, and index management, we evaluated the receipt of tumor markers, imaging, and clinic visits during initial evaluation and subsequent monitoring with respect to contemporaneous clinical guidelines. Care patterns were compared using chi-squared testing and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 2526 men with primary testis cancer, we assembled a cohort of 487 with seminoma (59.3%) or nonseminoma (40.7%), losing most to a lack of insurance or continuous coverage. The cohort was predominantly white (92.4%) and had stage I disease (87.9%). Overall, 18.9% had complete tumor markers, staging imaging, and visits with 2 relevant specialists as recommended during their initial evaluation. For subsequent monitoring, 17.5% of patients with seminoma on active surveillance met minimal thresholds for recommended testing and follow-up during the first year vs. 21.9% and 34.9% of patients with seminoma treated with adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy, respectively. For nonseminoma, 10.1% of men on active surveillance met the minimal thresholds for recommended monitoring compared with 60.4% and 62.0% of those treated with surgery and chemotherapy, respectively. Recommended monitoring also differed by academic vs. community setting and receipt of recommended evaluation (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: From real-world data, the evaluation and monitoring of patients with testis cancer appears substandard. Ongoing data and quality gaps highlight potential challenges with generating real-world evidence and ensuring adequate surveillance in this population.

Does histologic subtype impact overall survival in observed T1a kidney cancers compared with competing risks? Implications for biopsy as a risk stratification tool.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess if adding a biopsy proven histologic subtype to a model that predicts overall survival that includes variables representing competing risks in observed, biopsy proven, T1a renal cell carcinomas, enhances the model's performance. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was assessed (years 2004-2015) for patients with observed T1a renal cell carcinoma who had undergone renal mass biopsy. Kaplan-Meier curves were utilized to estimate overall survival stratified by histologic subtype. We utilized C-index from a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the impact of adding histologic subtypes to a model to predict overall survival for each stage. RESULTS: Of 132 958 T1a renal masses identified, 1614 had biopsy proven histology and were managed non-operatively. Of those, 61% were clear cell, 33% papillary, and 6% chromophobe. Adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated a difference in overall survival between histologic subtypes (P = 0.010) with greater median overall survival for patients with chromophobe (85.1 months, hazard rate 0.45, P = 0.005) compared to clear cell (64.8 months, reference group). Adding histology to a model with competing risks alone did not substantially improve model performance (C-index 0.65 vs 0.64 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of histologic subtype into a risk stratification model to determine prognostic overall survival did not improve modeling of overall survival compared with variables representing competing risks in patients with T1a renal cell carcinoma managed with observation. These results suggest that performing renal mass biopsy in order to obtain tumor histology may have limited utility. Future studies should further investigate the overall utility of renal mass biopsy for observed T1a kidney cancers.

Comparison of Approaches for Measuring Adherence and Persistence to Oral Oncologic Therapies in Patients Diagnosed with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Adherence and persistence studies face several methodologic difficulties, including short-term mortality. We compared approaches to quantify adherence and persistence to first line (1L) oral targeted therapy (TT) in patients diagnosed with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: Patients with mRCC ages 66 years or more who initiated TTs within 4 months of diagnosis were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare-linked database (2007-2015). Adherence [proportion of days covered (PDC) >80%] was calculated using (i) PDC with a fixed 6-month denominator including then excluding patients who died within the 6 months and (ii) PDC with a denominator measuring time on treatment. Risk of nonpersistence was obtained by censoring death or treating death as a competing risk using cumulative incidence functions. RESULTS: Among 485 patients with mRCC initiating a 1L oral TT (sunitinib, 64%; pazopanib, 25%; other, 11%), 40% died within 6 months. Adherence was higher after restricting to patients who survived (60%) compared with including those patients and assigning zero days covered after death (47%). Risk of nonpersistence was higher when censoring patients at death, 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88-0.94], compared with treating death as a competing risk, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Different approaches to handling death resulted in different adherence and persistence estimates in the metastatic setting. Future studies should explicitly report the proportion of patient deaths over time and explore appropriate methods to account for death as competing risk. IMPACT: Use of several approaches can provide a more comprehensive picture of medication-taking behavior in the metastatic setting where death is a major competing risk.

Patterns of first-line targeted therapy utilization and adherence among older adults diagnosed with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Despite the rapid approval of targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) evidence on real world treatment patterns remains limited. This study evaluated patterns of first-line targeted therapy utilization and adherence in older adults, a population with a high burden of RCC. METHODS: 2093 patients aged ≥66 years with a primary diagnosis of mRCC were identified from United States (US)-based cancer registry and administrative claims data (2007-2015). We included only patients with de novo disease. We assessed the initiation of first-line targeted therapy within four months of diagnosis and persistence and adherence to targeted therapy, using the proportion of days covered (PDC). Multivariable logistic regression yielded adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to describe characteristics associated with targeted therapy versus no targeted therapy initiation and for high (≥80% PDC) versus low adherence. RESULTS: 28.8% of patients received first-line targeted therapy within four months of diagnosis, with the proportion of patients receiving targeted therapy increasing over time. Older age (one-year increment OR:0.95 95%CI 0.93, 0.97), high comorbidity burden (OR:0.65 95%CI0.46, 0.93) and clear cell histology (OR:1.54 95%CI 1.19, 2.00) were associated with targeted therapy initiation. 48.2% of patients exhibited a high PDC to oral targeted therapy at 120 days, which was attenuated with inclusion of patients who died during the time period (34.2% PDC ≥80%). CONCLUSION: Increasing age, high comorbidity burden and non-clear cell histology were associated with decreased targeted therapy initiation among patients with de novo mRCC. Our findings suggest adherence to oral therapies was low; future research exploring the mechanisms and impact of low adherence in this older patient population is warranted.

Linguistic Differences in Personal Statements of Urology Residency Applicants by Self-Reported Race and Ethnicity.

OBJECTIVES: To assess a potential source of bias that could contribute to underrepresentation of minorities in urology, we analyzed differences in linguistic characteristics in personal statements between urology residency applicants of various racial and ethnic groups. METHODS: Personal statements submitted by urology residency applicants to a urology program were evaluated with Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count, a validated text analysis program. Analyzed statements and application characteristics were compared according to self-identified race/ethnicity of the applicant using multivariable analysis and independent sample T-tests. RESULTS: Of 342 submitted personal statements, 181 applicants self-identified as White non-Hispanic, 86 as Asian, and 75 as "underrepresented in medicine" (URM) including Black and Hispanic/Latino applicants. Asian and URM applicants listed more research projects (11.7 and 12.9 vs 8.8, P = .01) and URM applicants had slightly lower USMLE Step 1 scores (238.5 vs 244.6, P = .01) compared to White applicants. When evaluating personal statements, all applicants wrote with the same degree of analytical thinking. Asian applicants scored lower in authenticity (P = .03) and emotional tone (P = .04) while URM applicants scored higher in clout (P = .04) compared to White applicants. In use of pronouns, Asian applicants used 'we/us/our' more often (P < .01), URM applicants used 'you' more often (P = .02), and White applicants used 'I' more often (P = .01). CONCLUSION: Significant linguistic differences exist among urology personal statements by racial/ethnic groups that may perpetuate stereotypes and bias in the application process. Appreciating these differences may help applicants avoid possibly detrimental linguistics and help residency programs recruit and support urology applicants from underrepresented backgrounds.

Phase II Study of Gemcitabine and Split-Dose Cisplatin Plus Pembrolizumab as Neoadjuvant Therapy Before Radical Cystectomy in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin in combination with the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab as neoadjuvant therapy before radical cystectomy (RC) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. METHODS: Patients with clinical T2-4aN0/XM0 muscle-invasive bladder cancer eligible for RC were enrolled. The initial six patients received lead-in pembrolizumab 200 mg once 2 weeks prior to pembrolizumab 200 mg once on day 1, cisplatin 70 mg/m2 once on day 1, and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 once on days 1 and 8 every 21 days for four cycles. This schedule was discontinued for toxicity and subsequent patients received cisplatin 35 mg/m2 once on days 1 and 8 without lead-in pembrolizumab. The primary end point was pathologic downstaging (< pT2N0) with null and alternative hypothesis rates of 35% and 55%, respectively. Secondary end points were toxicity including patient-reported outcomes, complete pathologic response (pT0N0), event-free survival, and overall survival. Association of pathologic downstaging with programmed cell death ligand 1 staining was explored. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled between June 2016 and March 2020 (72% cT2, 23% cT3, and 5% cT4a). Patients received a median of four cycles of therapy. All patients underwent RC except one who declined. Twenty-two of 39 patients (56% [95% CI, 40 to 72]) achieved < pT2N0 and 14 of 39 (36% [95% CI, 21 to 53]) achieved pT0N0. Most common adverse events (AEs) of any grade were thrombocytopenia (74%), anemia (69%), neutropenia (67%), and hypomagnesemia (67%). One patient had new-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus with ketoacidosis related to pembrolizumab and no patients required steroids for immune-related AEs. Clinicians consistently under-reported AEs when compared with patients. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin plus pembrolizumab met its primary end point for improved pathologic downstaging and was generally safe. A global study of perioperative chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab or placebo is ongoing.

Geriatric conditions and treatment burden following diagnosis of non-muscle- invasive bladder cancer in older adults: A population-based analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment burden is emerging as an important patient-centered outcome for older adults with cancer who concurrently manage geriatric conditions. Our objective was to evaluate the contribution of geriatric conditions to treatment burden in older adults with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). METHODS: We identified 73,395 Medicare beneficiaries age 66+ diagnosed with NMIBC (Stage