Prostate cancer mortality rates in low- and favorable intermediate-risk active surveillance patients: a population-based competing risks analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine prostate cancer (PCa) and other-cause mortality rates in low- and favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) active surveillance (AS) patients. METHODS: The SEER Prostate with Watchful Waiting database was used to identify men diagnosed with NCCN low or FIR PCa, between 2010 and 2015, managed with AS. FIR patients were subdivided into three subgroups, based on their intermediate risk factor: grade group two (GG2), PSA 10-20 ng/ml or cT2b-c disease. Cumulative incidence function curves with other-cause mortality as the competing risk were utilized. Predictors of PCa mortality were assessed using multivariable regression analysis with semi-parametric proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Among 70,871 patients, 48,127 (67.9%) had low and 22,744 (32.1%) had FIR disease. Median patient age was 64.0 years, and median PSA was 5.70 ng/ml. Median follow-up was 49.0 months. There were 166 (0.2%) PCa and 3,176 (4.48%) other-cause mortalities. The 5-year mortality rates in the low and FIR cohorts overall were 0.29% and 0.28%, respectively (p = 0.64). Within the FIR cohort, the corresponding rates were highest in the PSA 10-20 ng/ml subgroup at 0.73%, followed by 0.32% for GG2 FIR and 0.052% for cT2b-c FIR disease (p < 0.001). Older age at diagnosis (sHR 2.38, p = 0.006), Medicaid insurance (sHR: 2.58, p < 0.001), low socioeconomic (sHR 1.39, p = 0.032), and non-married statuses (sHR: 2.58, p < 0.001) were associated with increased PCa mortality. CONCLUSION: Intermediate-term PCa mortality rates in FIR PCa patients are non-significantly different to those with low-risk PCa. However, there is significant within-group heterogeneity, with PCa mortality rates significantly higher in the PSA 10-20 subgroup.

Suspension of Oncology Randomized Clinical Trials during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of COVID-Related Suspensions.

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov-registered oncology randomized controlled trials between September 2019 and December 2021 to identify predictors of trial suspensions. The dataset included 1,183 oncology trials, of which 384 (32.5%) were suspended. COVID-19 accounted for 47 (12.2%) suspensions. Trials that were single center- or US-based had higher odds of COVID-19 (ORs: 3.85 and 2.48, 95% CIs: 1.60-11.50 and 1.28-4.93, respectively) or any-reason suspensions (ORs: 2.33 and 2.04, 95% CIs: 1.46-3.45 and 1.40-2.76, respectively). Phase two (OR 1.27), three (OR 6.45) and four trials (OR 11.5) had increased odds of COVID-19 suspensions, compared to phase one trials.

Transparency of racial participation reporting in randomized controlled trials of minimally invasive surgical techniques.

BACKGROUND: Enrolment of racial/ethnic minorities in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has historically been poor, despite efforts at improving access to RCTs. Under-representation of racial/ethnic minorities limits the external validity and generalizability of trials. Our objective was to determine to what extent are published RCTs of minimally invasive surgical techniques reporting the racial composition of their study cohorts and to describe the racial composition of patients enrolled in these trials, where data were available. METHODS: EMBASE (OvidSP®), MEDLINE (OvidSP®), and Cochrane (Wiley®) databases were systematically searched from inception to December 22, 2017 to identify all RCTs comparing minimally invasive and classical surgical techniques. The Mann-Kendall trend test was used to evaluate reporting trends over the study period. Predictors of racial reporting were evaluated using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded 9,321 references of which 496 RCTs met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Racial information was reported in 20 (4.03%) studies. There was no significant improvement in racial reporting over the study period (p for trend = 0.31). Of the 17 different patient populations accounting for the 20 RCTs, 14 (82.4%) originated from the USA. Multicenter RCTs had significantly increased likelihood of reporting racial composition of the patient cohort (odds ratio 5.10, p = 0.025). White/Caucasian patients accounted for 84.5% of the pooled patient population, with Black/African American, Asian and Latin/Hispanic patients accounting for 7.9%, 1.2%, and 2.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among RCTs assessing minimally invasive surgical techniques over the past 30 years, data on included patients' race is poorly reported. In addition to important efforts to improve access to clinical trials for racial and ethnic minorities, efforts aimed at improving reporting and transparency of surgical RCTs are sorely needed.

Active surveillance in favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients: Predictors of deferred intervention and treatment choice.

INTRODUCTION: Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly used for favorable intermediate-risk (FIR) prostate cancer (PCa). Our objective was to determine oncological and sociodemographic predictors of deferred definitive therapy and decision for radical prostatectomy (RP) vs. radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Prostate with Watchful Waiting database was used to identify all FIR PCa diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 opting for AS for at least one year following diagnosis. We sought to determine predictors of treatment and treatment type using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 20 334 patients were identified. An annual decrease in incident FIR patients managed initially with AS between 2010 (4061) and 2015 (2947) was noted (p for trend &lt;0.001); 17 895 (88.0%) patients underwent deferred RP and/or RT. Patients with higher baseline cancer volume and clinical stage were significantly more likely to discontinue AS. Patients of higher socioeconomic status were more likely to undergo deferred therapy, with increased odds for RT over RP. African American patients had lower odds of undergoing definitive intervention (odds ratio 0.83, p=0.030) and were significantly more likely to opt for XRT. Oncological characteristics leading to FIR classification influenced treatment choice at the time of deferred intervention: RT was treatment of choice in 86.3% and 86.0% of Gleason group 2 and prostate-specific antigen 10-20 FIR patients, respectively; 96.1% of treated cT2b-c FIR patients opted for RP. CONCLUSIONS: Most FIR PCa patients initially managed with AS eventually undergo deferred definitive therapy, with choice of treatment significantly influenced by patients' baseline oncological and sociodemographic characteristics.

Retrospective analysis of small intracranial hemorrhage in trauma: Is acute care surgery team management alone safe?

Background: The Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) provide a validated framework for categorizing patients with small intracranial haemorrhages (ICH) who could be managed by acute care surgery without neurosurgical consultation or repeat head computed tomography in the absence of neurological deterioration. This replication study retrospectively applied BIG criteria to ICH subjects and only included BIG1 and BIG2 subjects.Methods: The trauma registry was queried from 2014 to 2019 for subjects with a traumatic ICH <1 cm, Glasgow Coma Scale score of 14/15 and not on anticoagulation therapy. Patients were then categorized under BIG 1 or BIG2 and outcomes were evaluated.Results: Two hundred fourteen subjects were reviewed (88 BIG1 and 126 BIG2). Twenty-three subjects had worse repeat imaging, but only one had worsening exam that resolved spontaneously. None required neurosurgical intervention. One died of non-neurological causes.Conclusions: Retrospective analysis supported our hypothesis that patients categorized as BIG1 or BIG2 could have been safely managed by acute care surgeons without neurosurgical consultation or repeat head imaging. A review of minor worsening on repeat imaging without changes in neurological exams and no need for neurosurgical interventions supports this evidence-based approach to the management of small intracranial haemorrhages.

Virtual Conferences and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Are We Missing Out with an Online Only Platform?

Virtual conferences rapidly became the norm during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although necessary, there are shortfalls to strictly virtual meetings, including less enthusiasm for submitting abstracts. An approach that combines in-person attendance and virtual platforms may be an optimal compromise both during the ongoing pandemic and moving forward.

Pathologic upgrading in favorable intermediate risk active surveillance patients: Clinical heterogeneity and implications for active surveillance decision.

INTRODUCTION: Current guidelines support active surveillance (AS) for select patients with favorable intermediate risk (FIR) prostate cancer (CaP). A significant proportion of FIR CaP patients undergoing surgical treatment are found to have evidence of adverse pathology. Our objective was to determine the incidence and predictors of pathologic upgrading in FIR AS patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Prostate with Watchful Waiting (WW) database was used to identify men younger than 80 years with National Comprehensive Cancer Network FIR CaP initially opting for AS and/or WW between 2010 and 2015 and subsequently underwent radical prostatectomy at least one year following diagnosis. Patients were assigned into one of three subgroups based on their intermediate risk factor: Gleason Score 7(3 + 4) (Group 1), prostate specific antigen level of 10-20 ng/ml (Group 2), and cT2b-c (Group 3). Pathologic upgrading was present in Group 1 if pathologic GS was 7 (4 + 3) or worse. For patients in Groups 2 and 3, upgrading occurred if pathologic GS was 7 (3 + 4) or worse. Oncologic and sociodemographic predictors of pathologic upgrading were evaluated univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 18,760 patients were identified. Pathologic upgrading occurred in 138 (13.3%), 59 (25.0%), and 8,011 (45.8%) patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Pathologic downgrading occurred in 226 (21.7%) patients in group 1. Significant predictors of pathologic upgrading on multivariable analysis included older age at diagnosis: 70 to 79 vs. 40 to 49 years (Groups 1 and 3, P < 0.05), a more recent diagnosis: 2014 to2015 vs. 2010-2011 (Groups 2 and 3, P < 0.005), higher volume disease: 37.5% to 49.9% vs. 0% to 12.4% (Groups 2 and 3, P < 0.005), and clinically palpable disease (Groups 1 and 2, P < 0.05). Additional risk factors for upgrading included uninsured or Medicaid status, diagnosis in a Western region (Group 2), African American ethnicity and higher socioeconomic status (Group 3) CONCLUSIONS: FIR CaP is a clinically heterogeneous risk group with incidence of pathologic upgrading ranging from 13.3% in those with GS 7 (3 + 4) to 45.8% in those with cT2b-c disease. Risk of pathologic upgrading in FIR CaP patients initially managed with AS and/or WW is significantly associated with multiple patient-level oncologic and sociodemographic variables.

Influence of Sociodemographic Factors on Definitive Intervention Among Low-risk Active Surveillance Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate sociodemographic factors influencing decision of initially active surveillance (AS) prostate cancer (CaP) patients to opt for definitive therapy, and, specifically, choice of radical prostatectomy (RP) versus radiation therapy (XRT). METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Prostate with Watchful Waiting database was used to identify AS patients diagnosed with NCCN low-risk CaP between 2010 and 2015. We sought to determine predictors of treatment type using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Out of 32,874 men included, 21,255 (64.7%) underwent delayed treatment, with 3,751 (17.6%) and 17,463 (82.2%) opting for RP and XRT, respectively. Patients who were married (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.18, P <.001), insured (OR 2.94, P <.001), of higher socioeconomic status (OR 1.67 for highest vs lowest, P <.01), and residing in a Southeastern or Midwestern region (ORs 1.26 and 1.22 vs Northeast, respectively, P <.01) were significantly more likely to undergo definitive intervention. A significant interaction between patient race and marital/socioeconomic statuses on the decision-making process was identified. Decision for XRT (vs RP) was more likely in older (OR 11.6 for 70-79 vs 50-59 years, P <.01), unmarried (OR 1.89, P <.01), African American (OR 1.41, P .018), and higher socioeconomic status (OR 1.54 for highest versus lowest quartile, P <.01) patients. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients initially treated with AS underwent delayed treatment. After accounting for pathologic characteristics, the interaction of sociodemographic factors including race, socioeconomic status, marital status, insurance status, and region of residence are significantly associated with the likelihood of undergoing definitive therapy.