Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening and 15-Year Prostate Cancer Mortality: A Secondary Analysis of the CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.

Impact of an Expanded Definition of Family History on Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Despite family history being an established risk factor for prostate cancer, the role of a broader definition of family history inclusive of not just prostate cancer but other genetically related malignancies has not been investigated in the active surveillance population. Here, we evaluate the impact of an expanded definition of family history on active surveillance outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer at Massachusetts General Hospital from 1997-2019 with detailed data available on family cancer history were identified. Primary outcome was biopsy progression-free survival, and secondary outcomes were treatment-free survival, adverse pathological features at prostatectomy, and biochemical recurrence after treatment. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. RESULTS: Among 855 evaluable patients, 300 (35.1%) patients had any family history of prostate cancer, and 95 (11.1%) had a family history of related malignancies suggestive of a hereditary cancer syndrome. Family history of prostate cancer alone was not associated with biopsy progression, whereas family history suggestive of a hereditary cancer syndrome was associated with a significantly increased risk of biopsy progression (HR 1.43, 95%CI 1.01-2.02), independent of other known clinicopathological risk factors in multivariable analysis. Similarly, family history suggestive of a hereditary cancer syndrome was associated with significantly lower treatment-free survival (HR 1.58, 95%CI 1.14-2.18) in multivariable analysis. No significant association was found between family history and adverse features on surgical pathology or biochemical recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: An expanded family history suggestive of a hereditary cancer syndrome is an independent predictor of biopsy progression during active surveillance. Men with such a family history may still be offered active surveillance but should be counseled regarding the higher risk of disease progression.

Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline PART II.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part II of the two-part series dedicated to Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline discussing prognostic and treatment recommendations for patients with castration-resistant disease. Please refer to Part I for discussion of the management of patients with biochemical recurrence without metastatic disease after exhaustion of local treatment options as well as those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. RESULTS: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Such statements are summarized in figure 1[Figure: see text] and detailed herein. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1998 to January Week 5 2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through December 2018), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 through February 6, 2019). An updated search was conducted prior to publication through January 20, 2020. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to improve the level of care for these patients.

Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline PART I.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part I of the two-part series dedicated to Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline discussing prognostic and treatment recommendations for patients with biochemical recurrence without metastatic disease after exhaustion of local treatment options as well as those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Please refer to Part II for discussion of the management of castration-resistant disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1998 to January Week 5 2019), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through December 2018), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 through February 6, 2019). An updated search was conducted prior to publication through January 20, 2020. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Such statements are summarized in figure 1[Figure: see text] and detailed herein. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to improve the level of care for these patients.

Radiation treatment in prostate cancer: covering the waterfront.

OBJECTIVES: To present an overview of radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer over the past decade. METHODS: The literature on prostate cancer radiation therapy was reviewed and summarised. Radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer has dramatically evolved in the past decade, with superior techniques and exciting advances, pushing the role of the radiation oncologist to new frontiers. RESULTS: Innovations in imaging, treatment delivery, and a deeper understanding of biology has resulted in more tailored RT for individuals. In the present review, we summarise the changing landscape and broadly discuss new developments in prostate RT. CONCLUSIONS: Questions and challenges remain in the field, however there are multiple opportunities to further improve upon RT for our patients with prostate cancer.

Radiation with or without Antiandrogen Therapy in Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Salvage radiation therapy is often necessary in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy and have evidence of prostate-cancer recurrence signaled by a persistently or recurrently elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level. Whether antiandrogen therapy with radiation therapy will further improve cancer control and prolong overall survival is unknown. METHODS: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 1998 through 2003, we assigned 760 eligible patients who had undergone prostatectomy with a lymphadenectomy and had disease, as assessed on pathological testing, with a tumor stage of T2 (confined to the prostate but with a positive surgical margin) or T3 (with histologic extension beyond the prostatic capsule), no nodal involvement, and a detectable PSA level of 0.2 to 4.0 ng per milliliter to undergo radiation therapy and receive either antiandrogen therapy (24 months of bicalutamide at a dose of 150 mg daily) or daily placebo tablets during and after radiation therapy. The primary end point was the rate of overall survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up among the surviving patients was 13 years. The actuarial rate of overall survival at 12 years was 76.3% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 71.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.99; P=0.04). The 12-year incidence of death from prostate cancer, as assessed by means of central review, was 5.8% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 13.4% in the placebo group (P<0.001). The cumulative incidence of metastatic prostate cancer at 12 years was 14.5% in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 23.0% in the placebo group (P=0.005). The incidence of late adverse events associated with radiation therapy was similar in the two groups. Gynecomastia was recorded in 69.7% of the patients in the bicalutamide group, as compared with 10.9% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of 24 months of antiandrogen therapy with daily bicalutamide to salvage radiation therapy resulted in significantly higher rates of long-term overall survival and lower incidences of metastatic prostate cancer and death from prostate cancer than radiation therapy plus placebo. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca; RTOG 9601 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002874 .).

Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer is a Viable Option for Men Younger than 60 Years.

PURPOSE: At most centers strict age criteria are lacking for eligibility for active surveillance of prostate cancer. Younger men are often counseled to undergo definitive treatment despite limited data on the outcomes of active surveillance in younger men. We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes in men who enrolled in active surveillance at age less than 60 vs 60 years old or older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 2 institutional cohorts of a total of 2,084 men in whom prostate cancer was managed by active surveillance between 1995 and 2016. We compared outcomes in men who began active surveillance at age 60 vs 60 years or older using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: We identified 417 and 1,667 men who began active surveillance at younger than 60 and 60 years old or older, respectively, who met study inclusion criteria. At a median followup of 6.2 years we found no significant difference between men younger than 60 and 60 years old or older in the 5-year rates of biopsy progression-free survival (83% vs 83%), treatment-free survival (74% vs 71%), metastasis-free survival (99.7% vs 99.0%) or prostate cancer specific survival (100% vs 99.7%). Of the younger men 131 (31%) ultimately underwent treatment, including for pathological progression in 67% and prostate specific antigen progression in 18%. On multivariate analysis significant predictors of biopsy progression and progression to treatment among younger men were 20% or greater involvement of any core on diagnostic biopsy (HR 2.21, p = 0.003) and prostate specific antigen density 0.15 ng/ml/ml or greater (HR 1.93, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Active surveillance is a viable option in select men younger than 60 years with low volume, low risk prostate cancer. However, patients must be surveyed closely and understand the significant likelihood of ultimately requiring treatment.

Incidence, Clinicopathological Risk Factors, Management and Outcomes of Nonmuscle Invasive Recurrence after Complete Response to Trimodality Therapy for Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

PURPOSE: We describe the incidence, clinicopathological risk factors, management and outcomes of recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer after a complete response to trimodality therapy of muscle invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 342 patients with cT2-4aN0M0 muscle invasive bladder cancer and a complete response after trimodality therapy from 1986 to 2013. Using competing risks analyses we examined the association between baseline clinicopathological variables and nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer outcomes. Kaplan-Meier and the generalized Fleming-Harrington test were used to compare disease specific and overall survival. RESULTS: At a median followup of 9 years nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurred in 85 patients (25%) who had had a complete response. On Kaplan-Meier analysis baseline carcinoma in situ was associated with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (p = 0.02). However, on multivariate analysis carcinoma in situ and other baseline clinicopathological characteristics did not predict such recurrence. Patients with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer had worse 10-year disease specific survival than those without recurrence (72.1% vs 78.4%, p = 0.002), although overall survival was similar (p = 0.66). Of the 39 patients (46%) who received adjuvant intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin 29 (74%) completed induction therapy and 19 (49%) reported bacillus Calmette-Guérin toxicity. Three-year recurrence-free and progression-free survival after induction bacillus Calmette-Guérin was 59% and 63%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After a complete response to trimodality therapy nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurred in 25% of patients, developing in some of them more than a decade after trimodality therapy. No baseline clinicopathological characteristics were associated with such recurrence after a complete response. Patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer recurrence had worse disease specific survival than those without such recurrence but similar overall survival. Adjuvant intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin had a reasonable toxicity profile and efficacy in this population. Properly selected patients with recurrent nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer after a complete response may avoid immediate salvage cystectomy.

Treatment of Non-Metastatic Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO Guideline.

PURPOSE: This multidisciplinary, evidence-based guideline for clinically non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer focuses on the evaluation, treatment and surveillance of muscle-invasive bladder cancer guided toward curative intent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review utilizing research from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality as well as additional supplementation by the authors and consultant methodologists was used to develop the guideline. Evidence-based statements were based on body of evidence strengths Grade A, B or C and were designated as Strong, Moderate and Conditional Recommendations with additional statements presented in the form of Clinical Principles or Expert Opinions. RESULTS: For the first time for any type of malignancy, the American Urological Association, American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society for Radiation Oncology and Society of Urologic Oncology have formulated an evidence-based guideline based on a risk-stratified clinical framework for the management of muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer. This document is designed to be used in conjunction with the associated treatment algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The intensity and scope of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer should focus on the patient, disease and treatment response characteristics. This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to evaluate and treat each patient, but higher quality evidence in future trials will be essential to improve level of care for these patients.

Hydrogel rectum-prostate spacers mitigate the uncertainties in proton relative biological effectiveness associated with anterior-oblique beams.

AIM: Anterior-oblique (AO) proton beams can form an attractive option for prostate patients receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) as they avoid the femoral heads. For a cohort with hydrogel prostate-rectum spacers, we asked whether it was possible to generate AO proton plans robust to end-of-range elevations in linear energy transfer (LET) and modeled relative biological effectiveness (RBE). Additionally we considered how rectal spacers influenced planned dose distributions for AO and standard bilateral (SB) proton beams versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We studied three treatment strategies for 10 patients with rectal spacers: (A) AO proton beams, (B) SB proton beams and (C) IMRT. For strategy (A) dose and LET distributions were simulated (using the TOPAS Monte Carlo platform) and the McNamara model was used to calculate proton RBE as a function of LET, dose per fraction, and photon α/ß. All calculations were performed on pretreatment scans: inter- and intra-fractional changes in anatomy/set-up were not considered. RESULTS: For 9/10 patients, rectal spacers enabled generation of AO proton plans robust to modeled RBE elevations: rectal dose constraints were fulfilled even when the variable RBE model was applied with a conservative α/ß = 2 Gy. Amongst a subset of patients the proton rectal doses for the planning target volume plans were remarkably low: for 2/10 SB plans and 4/10 AO plans, ≤10% of the rectum received ≥20 Gy. AO proton plans delivered integral doses a factor of approximately three lower than IMRT and spared the femoral heads almost entirely. CONCLUSION: Typically, rectal spacers enabled the generation of anterior beam proton plans that appeared robust to modeled variation in RBE. However, further analysis of day-to-day robustness would be required prior to a clinical implementation of AO proton beams. Such beams offer almost complete femoral head sparing, but their broader value relative to IMRT and SB protons remains unclear.

Dosimetric impacts of endorectal balloon in CyberKnife stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early-stage prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: In SBRT for prostate cancer, higher fractional dose to the rectum is a major toxicity concern due to using smaller PTV margin and hypofractionation. We investigate the dosimetric impact on rectum using endorectal balloon (ERB) in prostate SBRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty prostate cancer patients were included in a retrospective study, ten with ERB and 10 without ERB. Optimized SBRT plans were generated on CyberKnife MultiPlan for 5 × 7.25 Gy to PTV under RTOG-0938 protocol for early-stage prostate cancer. For the rectum and the anterior half rectum, mean dose and percentage of volumes receiving 50%, 80%, 90%, and 100% prescription dose were compared. RESULTS: Using ERB, mean dose to the rectum was 62 cGy (P = 0.001) lower per fraction, and 50 cGy (P = 0.024) lower per fraction for the anterior half rectum. The average V50% , V80% , V90% , and V100% were lower by 9.9% (P = 0.001), 5.3% (P = 0.0002), 3.4% (P = 0.0002), and 1.2% (P = 0.005) for the rectum, and lower by 10.4% (P = 0.009), 8.3% (P = 0.0004), 5.4% (P = 0.0003), and 2.1% (P = 0.003) for the anterior half rectum. CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions of dose to the rectum using ERB were observed. This may lead to improvement of the rectal toxicity profiles in prostate SBRT.

Using patient-reported outcomes to assess and improve prostate cancer brachytherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a successful quality improvement process that arose from unexpected differences in control groups' short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within a comparative effectiveness study of a prostate brachytherapy technique intended to reduce urinary morbidity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients planning prostate brachytherapy at one of three institutions were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Patients were surveyed using a validated instrument to assess treatment-related toxicity before treatment and at pre-specified intervals. Unexpectedly, urinary PROs were worse in one of two standard brachytherapy technique control populations (US-BT1 and US-BT2 ). Therefore, we collaboratively reviewed treatment procedures, identified a discrepancy in technique, made a corrective modification, and evaluated the change. RESULTS: The patient groups were demographically and clinically similar. In the first preliminary analysis, US-BT2 patients reported significantly more short-term post-treatment urinary symptoms than US-BT1 patients. The study's treating physicians reviewed the US-BT1 and US-BT2 treatment protocols and found that they differed in whether they used an indwelling urinary catheter. After adopting the US-BT1 approach, short-term urinary morbidity in US-BT2 patients decreased significantly. Brachytherapy procedures were otherwise unchanged. CONCLUSION: Many procedures in cancer treatments are not evaluated, resulting in practice variation and suboptimal outcomes. Patients, the primary medical consumers, provide little direct input in evaluations of their care. We used PROs, a sensitive and valid measure of treatment-related toxicity, for quality assessment and quality improvement (QA/QI) of prostate brachytherapy. This serendipitous patient-centred QA/QI process may be a useful model for empirically evaluating complex cancer treatment procedures and for screening for substandard care.

Transurethral surgery and twice-daily radiation plus paclitaxel-cisplatin or fluorouracil-cisplatin with selective bladder preservation and adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (RTOG 0233): a randomised multicentre phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: We assessed effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of paclitaxel or fluorouracil when added to radiation plus cisplatin followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in a programme of selected bladder preservation for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. METHODS: In our randomised phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients with T2-4a transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder at 24 medical centres in the USA. We randomly allocated patients to receive paclitaxel plus cisplatin (paclitaxel group) or fluorouracil plus cisplatin (fluorouracil group) with twice-daily radiation in random block sizes per site on the basis of clinical T-stage (T2 vs T3-4). Patients and physicians were aware of treatment assignment. All patients had transurethral resection of bladder tumour and twice-daily radiotherapy to 40·3 Gy, along with allocated chemotherapy, followed by cystoscopic and biopsy assessment of response. Patients who had a tumour response with downstaging to T0, Tcis, or Ta received consolidation chemoradiotherapy to 64·3 Gy, with the same chemotherapy regimen as in the induction phase. Patients received adjuvant cisplatin-gemcitabine-paclitaxel after the end of chemoradiotherapy. If, after induction, persistent disease was graded as T1 or worse, we recommended patients undergo cystectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. We assessed the primary endpoints of rates of treatment completion and toxic effects in all randomly allocated patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00055601. FINDINGS: Between Dec 13, 2002, and Jan 11, 2008, we enrolled 97 patients, of whom 93 were eligible for analysis. Median follow-up was 5·0 years (IQR 5·0-6·2). Of 46 patients in the paclitaxel group, 45 (98%) completed induction (16 [35%] with grade 3-4 toxicity), 39 (85%) completed induction and consolidation (11 [24%] with grade 3-4 toxicity due to consolidation), and 31 (67%) completed the entire protocol with adjuvant chemotherapy. 34 (85%) of 40 assessable patients in the paclitaxel group had grade 3-4 toxicity during adjuvant chemotherapy. Of 47 patients in the fluorouracil group, 45 (96%) completed induction (nine [19%] with grade 3-4 toxicity), 39 (83%) completed induction and consolidation (12 [26%] had grade 3-4 toxicity due to consolidation), and 25 (53%) completed the entire protocol with adjuvant chemotherapy. 31 (76%) of 41 assessable patients in the fluorouracil group had grade 3-4 toxicity during adjuvant chemotherapy. Five (11%) patients treated with the paclitaxel regimen and three (6%) patients treated with the fluorouracil regimen developed late grade 3-4 radiotherapy toxicities. 11 (24%) patients treated with the paclitaxel regimen and 16 (34%) patients treated with the fluorouracil regimen developed late grade 3-4 toxicities unrelated to radiotherapy. One patient (in the fluorouracil group) died during follow-up. Six (13%) patients in the paclitaxel group and in three (6%) patients in the fluorouracil group discontinued due to treatment-related toxicity. INTERPRETATION: In the absence of phase 3 data, our findings could inform selection of a bladder-sparing trimodality chemotherapy regimen for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute.

A Multi-Institutional Survey of Radiation Oncology Professionals' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Behaviors Toward Sexual and Gender Minority Patients With Cancer.

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals have an increased risk of poor health outcomes, in part due to knowledge and training gaps in health care education. This study sought to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors of various health care role groups within radiation oncology toward SGM patients. Methods and Materials: A 38-item web-based survey was emailed to 1045 staff across 2 large radiation oncology departments. The survey assessed demographics, attitudes, knowledge, and practice behaviors. χ2 tests were performed to explore differences in survey responses by age, political affiliation, religious identity, year since graduation, and role groups. One-way analysis of variance tests were conducted to determine differences between respondents' confidence in knowledge and performance on the knowledge section of the survey. Thematic analysis was applied to the open discussion section. Results: Of the 223 respondents, 103 clinicians (physicians/advanced practice providers/nurses) and 120 nonclinicians (administrative staff, medical assistants, and other nonmedical staff) participated in the survey (21.3% response rate): 72.6% answered the knowledge questions; 93.5% stated they were comfortable treating sexual minorities, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer + patients; 88% indicated comfort in treating transgender patients; 36.6% stated they were confident in their knowledge of the health needs of transgender patients; and 50.3% expressed confidence in treating lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer + patients. Fewer nonclinicians than clinicians thought that gender identity, sexual orientation, and sex assigned at birth were important to provide the best care (P < .05). The open comments section identified key themes, including the belief that current educational tools are not helpful, desire for more educational formats (lectures, case-based learning, seminars), and an overall interest in SGM health education. Conclusions: Most staff feel comfortable in treating SGM patients but are less confident in the distinct needs of this population. Knowledge gaps persist for both clinicians and nonclinicians, indicating a need for further training specific to oncology care.

Long-Term Results of Bladder Preservation With Twice-Daily Radiation Plus 5-Fluorouracil/Cisplatin or Daily Radiation Plus Gemcitabine for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer-Updated Report of NRG/RTOG 0712: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: For bladder-sparing treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer, 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin with twice-daily radiation (FCT) or gemcitabine plus daily radiation (GD) are effective chemoradiation (CRT) regimens. This trial evaluated these regimens and demonstrated efficacy with either regimen at 3 years. With further follow-up, longer-term results are reported here. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with cT2 to cT4a muscle-invasive bladder cancer were randomized to FCT or GD. Patients had a transurethral resection and induction CRT to 40 Gy. Patients with a complete response received consolidation CRT to 64 Gy. Others had cystectomy. Adjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy was administered. The primary endpoint was freedom from distant metastasis (FDM). This updated analysis reports 7-year data. Toxicity and efficacy endpoints, including bladder-intact distant metastasis-free survival (BI-DMFS) were also assessed. RESULTS: From December 2008 to April 2014, 70 patients were enrolled; 66 were eligible for analysis, 33 per arm. Median follow-up was 9.1 years for eligible living patients. At 7 years, FDM was 65% and 73% for FCT and GD, respectively. Bladder-intact distant metastasis-free survival was 58% (95% CI, 41-76) and 68% (95% CI, 51-84), respectively. The post hoc hazard ratio of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.37-1.55) showed no difference between treatments (P = .44). Overall survival at 7 years was 48% and 59%. There were 4 and 5 cystectomies performed for FCT and GD, respectively. In the FCT arm, there were 5 (16%), 1 (3%), and 0 grade 3, 4, and 5 late toxicities reported, respectively. In the GD arm, there were 7 (23%), 0, and 0 grade 3, 4, and 5 late toxicities reported, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both regimens maintained high FDM rates at 7 years. Cystectomy rates were low and overall survival rates were high on both arms. Late toxicity rates were low. Either gemcitabine and daily radiation or a cisplatin-based regimen are effective bladder-sparing therapies.

Long-term Outcomes of Chemoradiation for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer in Noncystectomy Candidates. Final Results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524-A Phase 1/2 Trial of Paclitaxel + Trastuzumab with Daily Radiation or Paclitaxel Alone with Daily Irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Chemo-radiation is a well-established alternative to radical cystectomy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Many patients due to age or medical comorbidity are unfit for either radical cystectomy, or standard cisplatin- or 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation, and do not receive appropriate treatment with curative intent. We treated patients with a less aggressive protocol employing seven weekly doses of paclitaxel and daily irradiation. In those whose tumors showed overexpression of her2/neu, seven weekly doses of trastuzumab were also administered. OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term survival outcomes and toxicity results of the of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Seventy patients were enrolled and 65 (median age: 76 yr) were deemed eligible. Patients were assigned to daily radiation and weekly paclitaxel + trastuzumab (group 1, 20 patients) or to daily radiation plus weekly paclitaxel (group 2, 45 patients) based on tumor her2/neu overexpression. Radiation was delivered in 1.8 Gy fractions to a total dose of 64.8 Gy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was unresolved treatment-related toxicity. The secondary endpoints were complete response rate, protocol completion rate, and disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Protocol therapy was completed by 60% (group 1) and 76% (group 2); complete response rates at 12 wk were 62% in each group. Acute treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of grade ≥3 were observed in 80% in group 1 and 58% in group 2. There was one treatment-related grade 5 AE in group 1. Unresolved acute treatment-related toxicity was 35% in group 1 and 31% in group 2. The median follow-up was 2.3 yr in all patients and 7.2 yr in surviving patients. Overall survival at 5 yr was 25.0% in group 1 and 37.8% in group 2 (33.8% overall). At 5 yr, disease-free survival was 15.0% in group 1 and 31.1% in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are not candidates for cystectomy or cisplatin chemotherapy, chemoradiation therapy offers a treatment with a significant response rate and 34% 5-yr overall survival. While there were many AEs in this medically fragile group, there were few grade 4 events and one grade 5 event attributable to therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with invasive bladder cancer who cannot tolerate surgery were treated with radiation and systemic therapy without surgically removing their bladders. Most patients tolerated the treatment, were able to keep their bladders, and showed a significant treatment response rate.

Setting the Stage: Feasibility and Baseline Characteristics in the PARTIQoL Trial Comparing Proton Therapy Versus Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Men with localized prostate cancer may receive either photon-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton beam therapy (PBT). The PARTIQoL trial (NCT01617161) demonstrates the feasibility of performing a large, multicenter phase 3 randomized trial comparing IMRT with PBT for localized prostate cancer. Here, we report baseline features of patients enrolled on this trial and present strategies to improve feasibility of other similar trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to either PBT or IMRT with stratification by institution, age, use of rectal spacer, and fractionation schedule (conventional fractionation: 79.2 Gy in 44 fractions vs moderate hypofractionation: 70.0 Gy in 28 fractions). The primary endpoint is a change from baseline bowel health using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite score 24 months after radiation therapy. Secondary objectives include treatment-related differences in urinary and erectile functions, adverse events, and efficacy endpoints. RESULTS: Between July 2012 and November 2021, 450 patients were successfully accrued. Patients were randomly assigned to either PBT (N = 226) or to IMRT (N = 224); 13 were ineligible or withdrew before treatment. The median age of 437 analyzed patients was 68 years (range, 46-89 years). A total of 41% of patients had low-risk and 59% had intermediate-risk disease. In total, 49% of patients were treated with conventional fractionation and 51% with moderately hypofractionation. 48% of patients used a rectal spacer. For patients receiving PBT, pencil beam scanning was used in 48%. PBT and IMRT arms were balanced for baseline variables. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant challenges, the PARTIQoL trial demonstrated that, with targeted recruitment approaches, multicenter collaboration, payer engagement, and protocol updates to incorporate contemporary techniques, it is feasible to perform a large phase 3 randomized clinical trial to assess whether PBT improves outcomes. We will separately report primary results and continue to monitor participants for longer follow-up and secondary endpoints.

Patient-reported outcomes after 3-dimensional conformal, intensity-modulated, or proton beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have suggested differing toxicity patterns for patients with prostate cancer who receive treatment with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), or proton beam therapy (PBT). METHODS: The authors reviewed patient-reported outcomes data collected prospectively using validated instruments that assessed bowel and urinary quality of life (QOL) for patients with localized prostate cancer who received 3DCRT (n = 123), IMRT (n = 153) or PBT (n = 95). Clinically meaningful differences in mean QOL scores were defined as those exceeding half the standard deviation of the baseline mean value. Changes from baseline were compared within groups at the first post-treatment follow-up (2-3 months from the start of treatment) and at 12 months and 24 months. RESULTS: At the first post-treatment follow-up, patients who received 3DCRT and IMRT, but not those who received PBT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in bowel QOL. At 12 months and 24 months, all 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful decrements in bowel QOL. Patients who received IMRT reported clinically meaningful decrements in the domains of urinary irritation/obstruction and incontinence at the first post-treatment follow-up. At 12 months, patients who received PBT, but not those who received IMRT or 3DCRT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in the urinary irritation/obstruction domain. At 24 months, none of the 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful changes in urinary QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received 3DCRT, IMRT, or PBT reported distinct patterns of treatment-related QOL. Although the timing of toxicity varied between the cohorts, patients reported similar modest QOL decrements in the bowel domain and minimal QOL decrements in the urinary domains at 24 months. Prospective randomized trials are needed to further examine these differences.

Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline.

PURPOSE: The guideline purpose is to provide the urologist with a framework for the early detection of prostate cancer in asymptomatic average risk men. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and summarized evidence derived from over 300 studies that addressed the predefined outcomes of interest (prostate cancer incidence/mortality, quality of life, diagnostic accuracy and harms of testing). In addition to the quality of evidence, the panel considered values and preferences expressed in a clinical setting (patient-physician dyad) rather than having a public health perspective. Guideline statements were organized by age group in years (age <40; 40 to 54; 55 to 69; ≥ 70). RESULTS: Except prostate specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening, there was minimal evidence to assess the outcomes of interest for other tests. The quality of evidence for the benefits of screening was moderate, and evidence for harm was high for men age 55 to 69 years. For men outside this age range, evidence was lacking for benefit, but the harms of screening, including over diagnosis and overtreatment, remained. Modeled data suggested that a screening interval of two years or more may be preferred to reduce the harms of screening. CONCLUSIONS: The Panel recommended shared decision-making for men age 55 to 69 years considering PSA-based screening, a target age group for whom benefits may outweigh harms. Outside this age range, PSA-based screening as a routine could not be recommended based on the available evidence.