Association of Cabozantinib Dose Reductions for Toxicity With Clinical Effectiveness in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC): Results From the Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System (CKCis).

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib, an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has demonstrated efficacy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The association between toxicity and therapeutic effectiveness has been established with other TKIs. We investigated whether cabozantinib dose reductions, a surrogate for toxicity and adequate drug exposure, were associated with improved clinical outcomes in mRCC. METHODS: Employing the CKCis database, we analyzed patients treated with cabozantinib in the second line or later between 2011 to 2021. The cohort was stratified into those needing dose reductions (DR) during treatment and those not (no-DR). Outcomes, including objective response rate (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS), were compared based on dose reduction status. The influence of the initial dose on outcomes was also explored. RESULTS: Among 319 cabozantinib-treated patients, 48.3% underwent dose reductions. Response rates exhibited no significant difference between the DR and no-DR groups (15.1% vs. 18.2%, P = .55). Patients with DR had superior median OS (26.15 vs. 15.47 months, P = .019) and TTF (12.74 vs. 6.44 months, P = .022) compared to no-DR patients. These differences retained significance following adjustment for IMDC risk group (OS HR = 0.67, P = .032; TTF HR = 0.65, P = .008). There was no association between the initial dose and ORR, OS, or TTF. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the link between cabozantinib dose reductions due to toxicity and improved survival and time to treatment failure in mRCC patients. These findings underscore the potential of using on-treatment toxicity as an indicator of adequate drug exposure to individualize dosing and optimize treatment effectiveness. Larger studies are warranted to validate these results and develop individualized strategies for cabozantinib when given alone or in combination with immunotherapy.

MRI-guided Focused Ultrasound Focal Therapy for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Final Results from a 2-year Phase II Clinical Trial.

Background MRI-guided focal therapy (FT) allows for accurate targeting of localized clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) while preserving healthy prostate tissue, but the long-term outcomes of this approach require more study. Purpose To assess the 2-year oncological and functional outcomes of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with targeted FT. Materials and Methods In this single-center prospective phase II trial, men with localized unifocal intermediate-risk PCa underwent transrectal MRI-guided focused ultrasound between July 2016 and July 2019. Planned ablation volumes included 10-mm margins when possible. Data regarding adverse events were collected and quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by participants at 6 weeks and at 5, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. Multiparametric MRI and targeted and systematic biopsies were performed at 24 months. Ablation volumes were determined by manual contouring of nonperfused volumes on immediate contrast-enhanced images. Generalized estimating equations were used to model trends in quality-of-life measures. Results Treatment was successfully completed in the 44 participants (median age, 67 years; IQR, 62-70 years; 36 patients with grade group [GG] 2; eight patients with GG 3). No major adverse events from treatment were recorded. One participant refused biopsy at 24 months. After 2 years, 39 of 43 participants (91%) had no csPCa at the treatment site and 36 of 43 (84%) had no cancer in the entire gland. No changes in International Index of Erectile Function-15 score or International Prostate Symptom Score were observed during 2-year follow-up (P = .73 and .39, respectively). Conclusion The majority of men treated with MRI-guided focused ultrasound for intermediate risk PCa had negative results for csPCa at biopsy 2 years after treatment. Additionally, there was no significant decline in quality of life per the validated questionnaires. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02968784 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Woodrum in this issue.

Addressing controversial areas in the management of advanced prostate cancer in Canada Areas of consensus and controversy from the third Canadian consensus forum.

INTRODUCTION: The management of prostate cancer (PCa) is rapidly evolving. Treatment and diagnostic options grow annually, however, high-level evidence for the use of new therapeutics and diagnostics is lacking. In November 2022, the Genitourinary Research Consortium held its 3rd Canadian Consensus Forum (CCF3) to provide guidance on key controversial areas for management of PCa. METHODS: A steering committee of eight multidisciplinary physicians identified topics for discussion and adapted questions from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022 for CCF3. Questions focused on management of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC); use of novel imaging, germline testing, and genomic profiling; and areas of non-consensus from CCF2. Fifty-eight questions were voted on during a live forum, with threshold for "consensus agreement" set at 75%. RESULTS: The voting panel consisted of 26 physicians: 13 urologists/uro-oncologists, nine medical oncologists, and four radiation oncologists. Consensus was reached for 32 of 58 questions (one ad-hoc). Consensus was seen in the use of local treatment, to not use metastasis-directed therapy for low-volume mCSPC, and to use triplet therapy for synchronous high-volume mCSPC (low prostate-specific antigen). Consensus was also reached on sufficiency of conventional imaging to manage disease, use of germline testing and genomic profiling for metastatic disease, and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for BRCA-positive prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: CCF3 identified consensus agreement and provides guidance on >30 practice scenarios related to management of PCa and nine areas of controversy, which represent opportunities for research and education to improve patient care. Consensus initiatives provide valuable guidance on areas of controversy as clinicians await high-level evidence.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Indeterminate Renal Mass, From the AJR "How We Do It" Special Series.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is distinguished from CT and MRI by the use of microbubble ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) with intravascular blood pool distribution. When performing CEUS, low-intensity ultrasound allows real-time tissue subtraction imaging, whereas high-intensity ultrasound leads to microbubble destruction, enabling visualization of the contrast inflow pattern. CEUS has exceptional contrast resolution that enables the detection of even minimal blood flow, achieving very high NPV for ruling out vascular perfusion and providing high frame rates in the evaluation of tissue perfusion dynamics. UCAs undergo hepatic metabolism and pulmonary clearance, ensuring safety in patients with renal impairment. CEUS excels in distinguishing solid from cystic renal masses, with higher sensitivity than CT or MRI for detection of lesion enhancement. CEUS can aid the further characterization of both solid and cystic lesions and may have particular applications in the surveillance of cystic masses and surveillance after renal cell carcinoma ablation. This review describes the use of CEUS to help characterize indeterminate renal masses, based on the authors' institutional experience. The article highlights key differences between CEUS and CT or MRI, and provides practical insights for performing and interpreting CEUS of renal masses.

Addition of Cribriform and Intraductal Carcinoma Presence to Prostate Biopsy Reporting Strengthens Pretreatment Risk Stratification Using CAPRA and NCCN Tools.

BACKGROUND: Pretreatment stratification tools can help in clinical decision making in prostate cancer. To date, none incorporates well-established routinely reported adverse prognostic pathologic features such as intraductal carcinoma of prostate (IDC) or cribriform pattern 4 (CC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of addition of CC and/or IDC on the Cancer of Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) and National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN) tools for predicting biochemical recurrence free survival (BCR-FS) and event-free survival (EFS) across multiple patient cohorts. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Matched prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomies from institutions in Toronto, Wisconsin and Rotterdam. The presence/absence of CC/IDC was recorded on all biopsies. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Relationship to outcome was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models, ANOVA and Harrell's concordance index. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 1326 patients (Toronto- 612, Wisconsin- 542, Rotterdam- 172) with median follow up of 4.2 years (IQR 2.9-6.4 years); 306 (23.1%) had CC/IDC on biopsy with 207 (20.9%) BCR and 154 (11.6%) events (metastases/death). Addition of CC/IDC improved stratification in CAPRA scores 3 to 5 for BCR-FS (c-index increase 0.633-0.658, P < .001) and scores 6-10 for EFS (c-index increase 0.653-0.697, P < .001). For NCCN, all risk groups apart from score 1 to 2 showed improvement in BCR-FS (c-index increase 0.599-0.636, P < 0.001) and EFS prediction (c-index increase 0.648-0.697, P < .001). Sub-analysis of grade group (GG) 2 biopsies showed similar findings. The retrospective nature and inclusion of cases only reported by genitourinary pathologists are study limitations. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefit of the addition of CC/IDC to both CAPRA and NCCN pretreatment tools was validated in 3 cohorts, including the subset of biopsy GG2 prostate cancer patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: Including additional pathologic features to existing pretreatment, clinical decision making tools improves the ability to predict prostate cancer recurrence, cancer spread and death of disease.

The impact of robotic surgery access on the management of patients with clinical stage I kidney tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic surgery is used in the treatment of kidney tumors. We aimed to determine if robotic access was associated with initial choice of management for patients with a clinical stage I kidney mass. METHODS: Patients with a clinical stage I kidney mass were identified from the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) cohort. Sites were classified by year and access to robotic surgery. Associations between robotic access and initial management were determined using logistic regression. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed, adjusting for tumor size and stage, and presented as relative risks (RR ) or adjusted RR (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 4160 patients were included. Among patients treated with surgery, the proportion of partial nephrectomy compared to radical nephrectomy was significantly higher in robotic sites (77.3% for robotic sites vs. 65.9% for non-robotic sites; RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.23, p<0.0001; aRR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08-1.17, p<0.0001). Patients receiving partial nephrectomy at sites with robotic access were more likely to receive a minimally invasive approach compared to patients at non-robotic sites (61.4% vs. 50.9%, RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12-1.30; aRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.25, p<0.0001). The proportion of patients managed by active surveillance was not significantly different between robotic (405, 16.9%) and non-robotic (258, 14.7%) sites (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.99-1.32; aRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Access to robotic kidney surgery was associated with increased use of partial nephrectomy and minimally invasive partial nephrectomy. Use of active surveillance was similar at robotic and non-robotic institutions. Limitations of this study include lack of data on perioperative complications and cancer recurrence.

Real-world Assessment of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with or Without Sarcomatoid Features Treated with First-line Systemic Therapies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients have been reported to have better outcomes when treated with immunotherapies (IO) compared to targeted therapies (TT). This study aims to evaluate the impact of first-line systemic therapies on survival of mRCC patients with or without sarcomatoid features using real-world data. METHODS: Metastatic RCC patients of International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or high risk, diagnosed from January 2011 to December 2022, treated with first-line systemic therapies, and with histological documentation of the presence or absence of sarcomatoid features in nephrectomy specimens were identified using the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system. Patients were classified by initial treatment: (1) targeted therapy (TT) used alone or (2) immunotherapy (IO)-based systemic therapies used in combination of either IO-IO or IO-TT. The inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity scores was used to balance for covariates. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the impact of initial treatment received on overall survival (OS). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 1202 eligible patients, 791 were treated with TT and 411 with IO combinations. Of the patients, 76% were male, and the majority (91%) had a nephrectomy before systemic therapy. In nonsarcomatoid patients (639 TT and 320 IO patients), treatment with IO was associated with improved OS compared with patients treated with TT (median of 72 vs 48 mo, hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.80, objective response rate [ORR] of 38.5% for IO and 23.5% for TT). In sarcomatoid patients (152 TT and 91 IO patients), treatment with IO was associated with improved OS (median of 48 vs 18 mo, HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26-0.64, ORR of 49.5% for IO and 13.8% for TT). Similar results were observed in patients with synchronous metastatic disease only. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: IO treatment was associated with improved survival in mRCC patients. The magnitude of benefit is increased in patients with sarcomatoid mRCC, consequently, identifying the sarcomatoid status early on could help healthcare providers make a better treatment decision. PATIENT SUMMARY: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients of International mRCC Database Consortium intermediate and high risk, diagnosed from January 2011 to December 2022, treated with first-line systemic therapies, and with histological documentation of the presence or absence of sarcomatoid features in nephrectomy specimens were identified using the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis). In this study, treatment with immunotherapy was associated to an improved survival and response rates for mRCC patients with and without sarcomatoid features. The magnitude of benefit is increased in patients with sarcomatoid mRCC.

Trends of Utilization of Systemic Therapies for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Canadian Health Care System.

PURPOSE: Standard-of-care therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have greatly evolved. However, the availability of emerging options in global health care systems can vary. We sought to describe the integration and usage of systemic therapies for mRCC in Canada since 2011. METHODS: We included patients with mRCC enrolled in the Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System, a prospective cohort of patients from 14 Canadian academic centers, who received systemic therapy from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021. Patients were stratified by treatment era (cohort 1: 2011-2015, cohort 2: 2016-2021). Stacked bar charts were used to present treatment proportions; Sankey diagrams were used to show the evolution of treatment sequencing between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Four thousand one hundred seven patients were diagnosed with mRCC, of whom 2,752 (67%) received systemic therapy. Among these patients, mean age was 64 years, 74% were male, 75% had clear cell histology, and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk classification was favorable, intermediate, and poor in 16%, 56%, and 28%, respectively. Utilization of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI)-based treatments has increased in Canada and reflects global and local patterns of approval and adoption. The use of therapies after doublet ICI has mostly shifted toward vascular endothelial growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF-TKIs) that were previously used in first line with subsequent treatments reflecting approved and available agents after previous VEGF-TKI. Clinical trial participation among patients who received systemic therapy was 18% in first, 21% in second, and 24% in third line. CONCLUSION: In Canada's publicly funded health care system, availability of standard mRCC therapies broadly reflects access from government-funded clinical trials and compassionate access program sources. In an evolving therapeutic landscape, ongoing advocacy is required to continue to facilitate patient access to efficacious therapies.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsies: 2-year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial (PRECISE).

BACKGROUND: The prospective randomized PRECISE trial demonstrated that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with only targeted biopsy (TBx) was noninferior to systematic transrectal ultrasound biopsy (SBx) in the detection of International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) ≥2 prostate cancer (PC). An unanswered question is the outcome for patients who avoided a biopsy because of negative MRI findings. OBJECTIVE: To explore the rate of PC diagnosis based on 2-yr MRI for PRECISE participants who had no biopsy and for patients who had a negative result or GG 1 on TBx in comparison to those with a negative result or GG 1 on SBx. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The PRECISE prospective trial was conducted at five Canadian academic centers. The present analysis was for trial participants who were not diagnosed with clinically significant PC (csPC) at baseline. Of 453 randomized patients, 146 were diagnosed with GG ≥2 at baseline and were excluded. Eligible patients for this study included 83 men from the MRI arm who had negative MRI findings and no biopsy, 120 from the overall cohort who had a negative SBx or TBx, and 72 from the overall cohort who were diagnosed with GG 1 disease. INTERVENTION: MRI at 2 yr in all men in the MRI and SBx arms and TBx for lesions with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score of ≥3 or on the basis of clinical suspicion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the proportion of men diagnosed with GG ≥2 cancer. Secondary outcomes included the MRI outcome and the proportion of men diagnosed with GG 1 PC. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Evaluable 2-yr MRI scans were available for 75 (56%) eligible patients in the MRI arm and 69 (49%) in the SBx arm. Of these patients, 55 (73%) in the MRI arm and 51 (67%) SBx arm had negative 2-yr MRI. Of the 76 patients in the SBx arm with 2-yr MRI, 16 (21%) had a biopsy, for which the result was negative in eight (10%), GG1 in two (2.6%), and GG ≥2 in six (7.9%) cases. Of the 75 men in the MRI arm with 2-yr MRI, eight (11%) were biopsied, for which the result was negative in four cases (5%) and GG ≥2 in the other four (5%). At 2 yr, including baseline biopsy results, 116/221 (52.5%) in the MRI arm and 113/204 (55%) in the SBx arm were free of GG ≥2 disease, treatment, death from any cause, or progression (OR 1.08; p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: After 2-yr follow-up including MRI for patients in both arms of PRECISE, there was no difference in the rate of csPC diagnosis between the MRI and SBx groups, even though 38% of men in the MRI group avoided an initial biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: The PRECISE trial compared systematic biopsy of the prostate to a strategy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with targeted biopsy of any lesions suspicious for cancer on the scan. After 2 years of follow-up that included 2-year MRI with or without biopsy in both groups, there was no difference in the rate of diagnosis of significant cancer, even though 38% of men in the initial MRI arm avoided an initial biopsy, and 30% avoided biopsy altogether. The PRECISE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02936258.

Estimated glomerular filtration rate from the renal hypothermia trial: clinical implications.

OBJECTIVE: To assess if estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) can replace measured GFR (mGFR) in partial nephrectomy (PN) trials, using data from a randomised clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the renal hypothermia trial. Patients underwent mGFR with diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) plasma clearance preoperatively and 1 year after PN. The eGFR was calculated using the 2009 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) creatinine equations incorporating age and sex, with and without race: 2009 eGFRcr(ASR) and 2009 eGFRcr(AS), and the 2021 equation that only incorporates age and sex: 2021 eGFRcr(AS). Performance was evaluated by determining the median bias, precision (interquartile range [IQR] of median bias), and accuracy (percentage of eGFR within 30% of mGFR). RESULTS: Overall, 183 patients were included. Pre- and postoperative median bias and precision were similar between the 2009 eGFRcr(ASR) (-0.2 mL/min/1.73 m2 , 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.2 to 1.7, IQR 18.8; and -2.9, 95% CI -5.1 to -1.5, IQR 15, respectively) and 2009 eGFRcr(AS) (-0.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 , 95% CI -2.4 to 1.5, IQR 18.8; and -3.0, 95% CI -5.7 to -1.7, IQR 15.0, respectively). Bias and precision were worse for the 2021 eGFRcr(AS) (-8.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 , 95% CI -10.9 to -6.3, IQR 24.7; and -12.0, 95% CI -15.8 to -8.9, IQR 23.5, respectively). Similarly, pre- and postoperative accuracy was >90% for the 2009 eGFRcr(ASR) and 2009 eGFRcr(AS) equations. Accuracy was 78.6% preoperatively and 66.5% postoperatively for 2021 eGFRcr(AS). CONCLUSION: The 2009 eGFRcr(AS) can accurately estimate GFR in PN trials and could be used instead of mGFR to reduce cost and patient burden.

Quantitative and qualitative impact of physician assistants in a Canadian urology setting.

INTRODUCTION: Physician assistants (PAs) are healthcare professionals who act as physician extenders. PAs are being used more and more in a wide variety of clinic settings throughout Canada to increase access to healthcare and reduce cost. We set out to determine the impact of PAs on a tertiary care center urologic oncology practice. METHODS: We reviewed Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) billing codes since the introduction of PAs for two attending urologists at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Data were grouped into early experience and established experience. In addition, questionnaires were electronically distributed among nurses, physicians, residents, and fellows who work with PAs in clinic. Patient visits conducted by PAs were tracked for one quarter to estimate the amount of annual patients seen by PAs. The costs associated with PAs are presented as recommendations for a new graduate PA hire. RESULTS: On average, PAs increased clinic volume by 11.3 patient visits per day. Furthermore, they individually care for an average of 24 patients per day. PAs did not represent a financial burden on the urology practice plan (revenue gain of $16 800). Our questionnaire demonstrated that PAs were capable healthcare professionals, who decreased workload and contributed to resident/fellow education. CONCLUSIONS: PAs in a Canadian urology practice allow for more patient visits, decrease in physician workload, and positively impact trainee education. PAs saw more patients in clinic than clinic growth, thereby decreasing physician, fellow, and resident workload. The offset of the increase in patient visits made the PAs a cost-neutral investment.

Neoadjuvant Cabazitaxel plus Abiraterone/Leuprolide Acetate in Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer: ACDC-RP Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Early treatment intensification with neoadjuvant therapy may improve outcomes in patients with high-risk, localized prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Our objective was to compare pathologic, oncologic, and safety outcomes of neoadjuvant abiraterone acetate plus leuprolide acetate with or without cabazitaxel prior to radical prostatectomy in patients with localized, high-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, multicenter, phase II trial randomized men with clinically localized, D'Amico high-risk prostate cancer to neoadjuvant abiraterone acetate (1,000 mg/day) and leuprolide acetate (22.5 mg every 3 months) with or without cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2) prior to radical prostatectomy. The primary outcome was pathologic complete response (pCR) or minimal residual disease (MRD). Secondary outcomes included surgical margins, lymph node involvement, pathologic stage, 12-month biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) rates, and safety profile. RESULTS: The per-protocol population consisted of 70 patients [cabazitaxel arm (Arm A): 37, no cabazitaxel arm (Arm B): 33]. Median patient age and prostate-specific antigen levels were 63.5 years [interquartile range (IQR), 58.0-68.0] and 21.9 ng/mL (IQR, 14.6-42.8), respectively. pCR/MRD occurred in 16 (43.2%) versus 15 patients (45.5%) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.85). pCR occurred in two (5.4%) versus three patients (9.1%) in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.66). Patients with ≤ 25% total biopsy cores positive had increased odds of pCR/MRD (P = 0.04). Patients with pCR/MRD had superior 12-month BRFS rates (96.0% vs. 62.0%, P = 0.03). Grade 3+ adverse events occurred in 42.5% and 23.7% of patients in arms A and B, respectively (P = 0.078). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant cabazitaxel addition to abiraterone acetate/leuprolide acetate prior to radical prostatectomy did not improve pCR/MRD in clinically localized, high-risk prostate cancer.

Daily physical activity monitoring in older adults with metastatic prostate cancer on active treatment: Feasibility and associations with toxicity.

INTRODUCTION: Physical activity may be associated with cancer treatment toxicity, but generalizability to geriatric oncology is unclear. As many older adults have low levels of physical activity and technology use, this area needs further exploration. We evaluated the feasibility of daily step count monitoring and the association between step counts and treatment-emergent symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults aged 65+ starting treatment (chemotherapy, enzalutamide/abiraterone, or radium-223) for metastatic prostate cancer were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Participants reported step counts (measured via smartphone) and symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale) daily for one treatment cycle (i.e., 3-4 weeks). Embedded semi-structured interviews were performed upon completion of the study. The feasibility of daily monitoring was evaluated with descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. The predictive validity of a decline in daily steps (compared to pre-treatment baseline) for the emergence of symptoms was examined using sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV). Associations between a 15% decline in steps and the emergence of moderate (4-6/10) to severe (7-10/10) symptoms and pain in the next 24 h were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 90 participants, 47 engaged in step count monitoring (median age = 75, range = 65-88; 52.2% participation rate). Daily physical activity monitoring was found to be feasible (94% retention rate; 90.5% median response rate) with multiple patient-reported benefits including increased self-awareness and motivation to engage in physical activity. During the first treatment cycle, instances of a 15% decline in steps were common (n = 37, 78.7%), as was the emergence of moderate to severe symptoms overall (n = 40, 85.1%) and pain (n = 26, 55.3%). The predictive validity of a 15% decline in steps on the emergence of moderate to severe symptoms was good (sensitivity = 81.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 68.7-95.0; PPV = 73.0%, 95% CI = 58.7-87.3), although the PPV for pain was poor (sensitivity = 77.8%, 95% CI = 58.6-97.0; PPV = 37.8%, 95% CI = 22.2-53.5). In the regression models, changes in daily physical activity were not associated with symptoms or pain. DISCUSSION: Changes in physical activity had modest ability to predict moderate to severe symptoms overall. Although participation was suboptimal, daily activity monitoring in older adults with cancer appears feasible and may have other uses such as improving physical activity levels. Further studies are warranted.

Primary Whole-gland Ablation for the Treatment of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Focal Therapy Society Best Practice Statement.

CONTEXT: Whole-gland ablation is a feasible and effective minimally invasive treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Previous systematic reviews supported evidence for favorable functional outcomes, but oncological outcomes were inconclusive owing to limited follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the real-world data on the mid- to long-term oncological and functional outcomes of whole-gland cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in patients with clinically localized PCa, and to provide expert recommendations and commentary on these findings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library publications through February 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. As endpoints, baseline clinical characteristics, and oncological and functional outcomes were assessed. To estimate the pooled prevalence of oncological, functional, and toxicity outcomes, and to quantify and explain the heterogeneity, random-effect meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-nine studies were identified, including 14 on cryoablation and 15 on HIFU with a median follow-up of 72 mo. Most of the studies were retrospective (n = 23), with IDEAL (idea, development, exploration, assessment, and long-term study) stage 2b (n = 20) being most common. Biochemical recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and metastasis-free survival rates at 10 yr were 58%, 96%, 63%, 71-79%, and 84%, respectively. Erectile function was preserved in 37% of cases, and overall pad-free continence was achieved in 96% of cases, with a 1-yr rate of 97.4-98.8%. The rates of stricture, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, rectourethral fistula, and sepsis were observed to be 11%, 9.5%, 8%, 0.7%, and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The mid- to long-term real-world data, and the safety profiles of cryoablation and HIFU are sound to support and be offered as primary treatment for appropriate patients with localized PCa. When compared with other existing treatment modalities for PCa, these ablative therapies provide nearly equivalent intermediate- to long-term oncological and toxicity outcomes, as well as excellent pad-free continence rates in the primary setting. This real-world clinical evidence provides long-term oncological and functional outcomes that enhance shared decision-making when balancing risks and expected outcomes that reflect patient preferences and values. PATIENT SUMMARY: Cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound are minimally invasive treatments available to selectively treat localized prostate cancer, considering their nearly comparable intermediate- to long term cancer control and preservation of urinary continence to other radical treatments in the primary setting. However, a well-informed decision should be made based on one's values and preferences.

Association between the COVID-19 pandemic and first cancer treatment modality: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Physicians were directed to prioritize using nonsurgical cancer treatment at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to quantify the impact of this policy on the modality of first cancer treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy or no treatment). METHODS: In this population-based study using Ontario data from linked administrative databases, we identified adults diagnosed with cancer from January 2016 to November 2020 and their first cancer treatment received within 1 year postdiagnosis. Segmented Poisson regressions were applied to each modality to estimate the change in mean 1-year recipient volume per thousand patients (rate) at the start of the pandemic (the week of Mar. 15, 2020) and change in the weekly trend in rate during the pandemic (Mar. 15, 2020, to Nov. 7, 2020) relative to before the pandemic (Jan. 3, 2016, to Mar. 14, 2020). RESULTS: We included 321 535 people diagnosed with cancer. During the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic, the mean rate of receiving upfront surgery over the next year declined by 9% (rate ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.95), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates rose by 30% (rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.23-1.36) and 13% (rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.19), respectively. Subsequently, the 1-year rate of upfront surgery increased at 0.4% for each week (rate ratio 1.004, 95% CI 1.002-1.006), and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates decreased by 0.9% (rate ratio 0.991, 95% CI 0.989-0.994) and 0.4% (rate ratio 0.996, 95% CI 0.994-0.998), respectively, per week. Rates of each modality resumed to prepandemic levels at 24-31 weeks into the pandemic. INTERPRETATION: An immediate and sustained increase in use of nonsurgical therapy as the first cancer treatment occurred during the first 8 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario. Further research is needed to understand the consequences.

Applying Quality Indicators to Examine Quality of Care During Active Surveillance in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Although a few studies have reported wide variations in quality of care in active surveillance (AS), there is a lack of research using validated quality indicators (QIs). The aim of this study was to apply evidence-based QIs to examine the quality of AS care at the population level. METHODS: QIs were measured using a population-based retrospective cohort of patients with low-risk prostate cancer diagnosed between 2002 and 2014. We developed 20 QIs through a modified Delphi approach with clinicians targeting the quality of AS care at the population level. QIs included structure (n=1), process of care (n=13), and outcome indicators (n=6). Abstracted pathology data were linked to cancer registry and administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. A total of 17 of 20 QIs could be applied based on available information in administrative databases. Variations in QI performance were explored according to patient age, year of diagnosis, and physician volume. RESULTS: The cohort included 33,454 men with low-risk prostate cancer, with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 59-71 years) and a median prostate-specific antigen level of 6.2 ng/mL. Compliance varied widely for 10 process QIs (range, 36.6%-100.0%, with 6 [60%] QIs >80%). Initial AS uptake was 36.6% and increased over time. Among outcome indicators, significant variations were observed by patient age group (10-year metastasis-free survival was 95.0% for age 65-74 years and 97.5% in age <55 years) and physician average annual AS volume (10-year metastasis-free survival was 94.5% for physicians with 1-2 patients with AS and 95.8% for those with ≥6 patients with AS annually). CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes a foundation for quality-of-care assessments and monitoring during AS implementation at a population level. Considerable variations appeared with QIs related to process of care by physician volume and Qis related to outcome by patient age group. These findings may represent areas for targeted quality improvement initiatives.

Comparison of patients with renal cell carcinoma in adjuvant therapy trials to a real-world population.

PURPOSE: To compare characteristics and outcomes of patients included versus those not in adjuvant therapy trials post complete resection of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: Adult patients following complete resection for clear cell RCC between January 1, 2011, and March 31, 2021, were included. Patients had intermediate high, high risk nonmetastatic disease (modified UCLA Integrated Staging System) or fully resected metastatic (M1) disease as per the inclusion criteria of adjuvant studies. Demographic, clinical, and outcomes between trial and nontrial patients were compared. RESULTS: Of 1,459 eligible patients, 63 (4.3%) participated in an adjuvant trial. Disease characteristics were similar between groups. Trial patients were younger (mean age 58.1 vs. 63.6 years; P < 0.0001) and had lower Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (mean 4.2 vs. 4.9; P = 0.009). Unadjusted disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years for trial patients was 48.6% and 39.2% for nontrial patients (HR 0.71, 0.48-1.05, P = 0.08). Median DFS was higher for trial patients in comparison to nontrial patients (4.4 years, IQR 1.7- not reached; vs. 3.0 years, IQR 0.8-8.6; P = 0.08). Cancer specific survival (CSS) at 5 years for trial patients was 85.2% in comparison to 78.6% for nontrial patients (HR 0.45, 0.22-0.92, P = 0.03). Unadjusted estimated overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 80.8% for trial patients and 74.8% (HR 0.42, 0.18-0.94; P = 0.04) for nontrial patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in adjuvant trials were younger and healthier with longer CSS and OS in comparison to those not included in adjuvant trials. These findings may have implications when we generalize trial results to real world patients.

Development, multi-institutional external validation, and algorithmic audit of an artificial intelligence-based Side-specific Extra-Prostatic Extension Risk Assessment tool (SEPERA) for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension (ssEPE) is essential for performing nerve-sparing surgery to mitigate treatment-related side-effects such as impotence and incontinence in patients with localised prostate cancer. Artificial intelligence (AI) might provide robust and personalised ssEPE predictions to better inform nerve-sparing strategy during radical prostatectomy. We aimed to develop, externally validate, and perform an algorithmic audit of an AI-based Side-specific Extra-Prostatic Extension Risk Assessment tool (SEPERA). METHODS: Each prostatic lobe was treated as an individual case such that each patient contributed two cases to the overall cohort. SEPERA was trained on 1022 cases from a community hospital network (Trillium Health Partners; Mississauga, ON, Canada) between 2010 and 2020. Subsequently, SEPERA was externally validated on 3914 cases across three academic centres: Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON, Canada) from 2008 to 2020; L'Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (Paris, France) from 2010 to 2020; and Jules Bordet Institute (Brussels, Belgium) from 2015 to 2020. Model performance was characterised by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC), calibration, and net benefit. SEPERA was compared against contemporary nomograms (ie, Sayyid nomogram, Soeterik nomogram [non-MRI and MRI]), as well as a separate logistic regression model using the same variables included in SEPERA. An algorithmic audit was performed to assess model bias and identify common patient characteristics among predictive errors. FINDINGS: Overall, 2468 patients comprising 4936 cases (ie, prostatic lobes) were included in this study. SEPERA was well calibrated and had the best performance across all validation cohorts (pooled AUROC of 0·77 [95% CI 0·75-0·78] and pooled AUPRC of 0·61 [0·58-0·63]). In patients with pathological ssEPE despite benign ipsilateral biopsies, SEPERA correctly predicted ssEPE in 72 (68%) of 106 cases compared with the other models (47 [44%] in the logistic regression model, none in the Sayyid model, 13 [12%] in the Soeterik non-MRI model, and five [5%] in the Soeterik MRI model). SEPERA had higher net benefit than the other models to predict ssEPE, enabling more patients to safely undergo nerve-sparing. In the algorithmic audit, no evidence of model bias was observed, with no significant difference in AUROC when stratified by race, biopsy year, age, biopsy type (systematic only vs systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy), biopsy location (academic vs community), and D'Amico risk group. According to the audit, the most common errors were false positives, particularly for older patients with high-risk disease. No aggressive tumours (ie, grade >2 or high-risk disease) were found among false negatives. INTERPRETATION: We demonstrated the accuracy, safety, and generalisability of using SEPERA to personalise nerve-sparing approaches during radical prostatectomy. FUNDING: None.

Predicting the recurrence risk of renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy: potential role of CT-radiomics for adjuvant treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES: Previous trial results suggest that only a small number of patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) benefit from adjuvant therapy. We assessed whether the addition of CT-based radiomics to established clinico-pathological biomarkers improves recurrence risk prediction for adjuvant treatment decisions. METHODS: This retrospective study included 453 patients with non-metastatic RCC undergoing nephrectomy. Cox models were trained to predict disease-free survival (DFS) using post-operative biomarkers (age, stage, tumor size and grade) with and without radiomics selected on pre-operative CT. Models were assessed using C-statistic, calibration, and decision curve analyses (repeated tenfold cross-validation). RESULTS: At multivariable analysis, one of four selected radiomic features (wavelet-HHL_glcm_ClusterShade) was prognostic for DFS with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.44 (p = 0.02), along with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage group (III versus I, HR 2.90; p = 0.002), grade 4 (versus grade 1, HR 8.90; p = 0.001), age (per 10 years HR 1.29; p = 0.03), and tumor size (per cm HR 1.13; p = 0.003). The discriminatory ability of the combined clinical-radiomic model (C = 0.80) was superior to that of the clinical model (C = 0.78; p < 0.001). Decision curve analysis revealed a net benefit of the combined model when used for adjuvant treatment decisions. At an exemplary threshold probability of ≥ 25% for disease recurrence within 5 years, using the combined versus the clinical model was equivalent to treating 9 additional patients (per 1000 assessed) who would recur without treatment (i.e., true-positive predictions) with no increase in false-positive predictions. CONCLUSION: Adding CT-based radiomic features to established prognostic biomarkers improved post-operative recurrence risk assessment in our internal validation study and may help guide decisions regarding adjuvant therapy. KEY POINTS: In patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy, CT-based radiomics combined with established clinical and pathological biomarkers improved recurrence risk assessment. Compared to a clinical base model, the combined risk model enabled superior clinical utility if used to guide decisions on adjuvant treatment.