Oncologic surveillance after surgical treatment for clinically localized kidney cancer: UroCCR study n. 129.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, the EAU Guidelines implemented a novel, expert opinion-based follow-up scheme, with a three-risk-category system for clear cell (cc) and non-cc renal cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC) after surgery with curative intent. We aimed to validate the novel follow-up scheme and provide data-driven recurrence estimates according to risk groups, to confirm or implement the oncologic surveillance strategy. METHODS: We identified 5,320 patients from a prospectively maintained database involving 28 French referral centers. The risk of recurrence, as either loco-regional or distant, was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method for each group (low- intermediate- or high-risk) according to ccRCC or non-ccRCC histology. The noncumulative distribution of recurrences was graphically investigated through the LOWESS smoother. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred ninety-three (58%), 926 (23%), and 738 (19%) had low-, intermediate, and high-risk ccRCC, and 683 (50%), 297 (22%), and 383 (28%) had low-, intermediate, and high-risk non-ccRCC, respectively. Median follow-up for survivors was 46 months. Overall, 661 patients experienced recurrence. Over time, the noncumulative risk of recurrence was approximately 10% for low-risk cc-RCC, non-ccRCC, and intermediate-risk non-ccRCC, with non-significant difference among the three recurrence functions (P=0.9). At 5-year, time point after which imaging should be de-intensified to biennial, the noncumulative risks of recurrence were: for intermediate risk ccRCC and non-ccRCC: 15% and 11%, respectively; for high-risk ccRCC and non-ccRCC: 24% and 8%, respectively. Among high-risk non-ccRCC patients there were 9 recurrences at 3-month. There was no significant difference between the recurrence function of high-risk non-ccRCC patients with negative imaging at 3-month and the one of intermediate-risk ccRCC (P=0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Given the relatively low recurrence risk of patients with intermediate-risk non-ccRCC, those individuals could be followed up with a similar strategy to the low-risk category. Similarly, patients with high-risk non-ccRCC with negative imaging at 3-month, could be followed up similarly to intermediate-risk ccRCC after the 3-month time point.

Transrectal versus transperineal prostate fusion biopsy: a pair-matched analysis to evaluate accuracy and complications.

PURPOSE: To evaluate biopsy-related complications and detection rates of any PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa, intended as grade group ≥ 2) between MRI-targeted TP fusion biopsies (TPBx) and TR ones (TRBx). METHODS: We performed a multicentric study on 4841 patients who underwent fusion biopsy between 2016 and 2023. A case-control matching was performed to find comparable cohorts of 646 TPBx and 646 TRBx. Mean T test and Pearson chi-square tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the cohorts, except for target location with a higher rate of anterior lesions in TPBx group. Complications were rare and no difference was found between the groups, with similar rates of infections after TRBx and TPBx (N = 5 (0.8%) vs N = 2 (0.3%), p 0.45). All patients in TRBx and 90.1% in TPBx group received antibiotic prophylaxis. A higher csPCa detection rate was found in TPBx over the group (50.5% vs 36.2%, p < 0.001). On average, positive targeted cores were increased in TPBx group, for any PCa (1.6 vs 1.4, p 0.04) and csPCa (1.0 vs 0.8, p 0.02). Among the limitations of study, we acknowledge the retrospective design and the possible under-reporting of complications. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-targeted fusion TPBx achieves a significantly higher csPCa detection than TRBx, with a diagnostic advantage for apical and anterior lesions. No significant differences were found in terms of complications that were rare in both groups, considering a widespread adoption of antibiotic prophylaxis.

Appropriate antimicrobial prescribing for bacteriuria before urological procedures: A room for improvement.

In the presence of a positive preoperative urine culture, the prescription of a preoperative antibiotic therapy is recommended. The choice of antibiotic therapy and prescription are usually made by the urologist or the general practitioner (GP). The objective of the treatment is urinary sterilization rather than parenchymal treatment, and the treatment choice is key to reduce selective pressure and antimicrobial resistance. The objective of this study was to evaluate prescription patterns made by urologists and GPs, then to compare the antibiotics chosen by urologists or GPs to the "ideal" treatment defined by infectious diseases specialists. We retrospectively reviewed all positive preoperative urine cultures obtained between November 2022 and July 2023. Data pertaining to antibiotic prescriptions, including the duration of treatment, antibiotic class, and prescriber were collected. An infectious disease specialist conducted a blind review of each urine culture, providing recommendations for the most appropriate antibiotic based on their assessment. In cases of disagreement, a second infectious disease specialist conducted a similar evaluation. Out of 196 preoperative antibiotic prescriptions, 40 (20%) differed from the recommendations provided by the infectious disease specialist, with 39 involving the use of overly broad-spectrum antibiotics. Both infectious disease specialists yielded congruent recommendations in all cases. Notably, in 50% of these instances, the preoperative antibiotic treatment duration unduly exceeded 48hours. A statistically significant increase (4.84days vs. 2.99days) in preoperative treatment duration was observed when a GP was the prescriber (P<0.001). There is room for improvement of urologists' antibiotic prescription practices to reduce the ecological impact on the patient's microbiota and on a global scale. The delegation to GPs resulted in unjustified longer treatment durations and should be avoided without dedicated training. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer with high tumor burden at biopsy: lessons learned from a contemporary radical prostatectomy cohort.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate whether initial tumor burden at biopsy could predict adverse features after radical prostatectomy (RP) in International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 1 prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in six referral centers. The cohort included patients with ISUP 1 PCa at systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy. We defined a high tumor burden at biopsy if ≥ 20% of cores were positive. The endpoint of the study was adverse features at RP, defined as ≥ pT3a stage and/or N1 and/or ISUP ≥ 3. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess associations between different thresholds on biopsy (percentage of positive cores [PPC] ≥ 25%, ≥ 33%, ≥ 50%, bilateral positivity and positive cores > 3) and adverse features. As the number of targeted biopsies sampled may influence the number of positive cores, we used a virtual biopsy model in which all targeted biopsy results were interpreted as a single targeted biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 312 contemporary patients were included. At final pathology, 99 patients (32%) had adverse features. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, there was no statistical association between PPC > 20% and adverse features (OR = 1.22; 95%CI:0.69-2.22, p = 0.5). In sensitivity analysis, tumor burden at biopsy was not associated with the risk of adverse features, regardless of the definition used (all p > 0.05). When we considered a unique virtual targeted biopsy, tumor burden remained not associated with adverse features (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ISUP 1 PCa tumor burden at biopsy did not predict adverse features in this study, suggesting that it should not be used alone as an exclusion criterion when assessing eligibility for active surveillance.

Refining clinically relevant cut-offs of prostate specific antigen density for risk stratification in patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions.

BACKGROUND: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions, identified through multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), present a clinical challenge due to their equivocal nature in predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Aim of the study is to improve risk stratification of patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions and candidates for prostate biopsy. METHODS: A cohort of 4841 consecutive patients who underwent MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies between January 2016 and April 2023 were retrospectively identified from independent prospectively maintained database. Only patients who have PI-RADS 3 lesions were included in the final analysis. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify covariables associated with csPCa defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group ≥2. Performance of the model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and net benefit. Significant predictors were then selected for further exploration using a Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 790 patients had PI-RADS 3 lesions and 151 (19%) had csPCa. Significant associations were observed for age (OR: 1.1 [1.0-1.1]; p = 0.01) and PSA density (OR: 1643 [2717-41,997]; p < 0.01). The CHAID analysis identified PSAd as the sole significant factor influencing the decision tree. Cut-offs for PSAd were 0.13 ng/ml/cc (csPCa detection rate of 1% vs. 18%) for the two-nodes model and 0.09 ng/ml/cc and 0.16 ng/ml/cc for the three-nodes model (csPCa detection rate of 0.5% vs. 2% vs. 17%). CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with PI-RADS 3 lesions on prostate mpMRI and a PSAd below 0.13, especially below 0.09, prostate biopsy can be omitted, in order to avoid unnecessary biopsy and overdiagnosis of non-csPCa.

From Reporting to Improving: How Root Cause Analysis in Teams Shape Patient Safety Culture.

Background: Given the increasing focus on patient safety in healthcare systems worldwide, understanding the impact of Continuous Quality Improvement Programs (QIPs) is crucial. QIPs, including Morbidity and Mortality Conferences (MMCs) and Experience Feedback Committees (EFCs), have been identified as effective strategies for enhancing patient safety culture. These programs engage healthcare professionals in the identification and analysis of adverse events to foster a culture of safety (ie the product of individual and group value, attitudes, and perceptions about quality and safety). This study aimed to determine whether patient safety culture differed regarding care provider participation in MMCs and EFCs activities. Methods: A cross-sectional web-only survey was conducted in 2022 using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPS) among 4780 employees at an 1836-bed, university-affiliated hospital in France. We quantified the mean differences in the 12 HSOPS dimension scores according to MMCs and EFCs participation, using Cohen d effect size. We performed a multivariate analysis of variance to examine differences in dimension scores after adjusting for background characteristics. Results: Of 4780 eligible employees, 1457 (30.5%) participated in the study. Among the respondents, 571 (39.2%) participated in MMCs or EFCs activities. Participants engaged in MMCs or EFCs reported significantly higher scores in six out of twelve HSOPS dimensions, particularly in "Nonpunitive response to error", "Feedback and communication about error", and "Organizational learning" (Overall effect size = 0.14, 95% confidence interval = 0.11 to 0.17, P<0.001). Notably, involvement in both MMCs and EFCs was associated with higher improvements in patient safety culture compared to non-participation or singular involvement in either program. However, certain dimensions such as "Staffing", "Hospital management support", and "Hospital handoffs and transition" showed no significant association with MMCs or EFCs participation, highlighting broader systemic challenges. Conclusion: The study confirms the positive association between participation in MMCs or EFCs and an enhanced culture of patient safety, emphasizing the importance of such programs in fostering an environment conducive to learning, communication, and nonpunitive responses to errors. While MMCs or EFCs are effective in promoting certain aspects of patient safety culture, addressing broader systemic challenges remains crucial for comprehensive improvements in patient safety.

Circulating Biomarkers Predictive of Treatment Response in Patients with Hormone-sensitive or Castration-resistant Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) harbors genomic alterations that may predict targeted therapy efficacy. These alterations can be identified not only in tissue but also directly in biologic fluids (ie, liquid biopsies), mainly blood. Liquid biopsies may represent a safer and less invasive alternative for monitoring patients treated for mPCa. Current research focuses on the description and validation of novel predictive biomarkers to improve precision medicine in mPCa. Our aim was to systematically review the current evidence on liquid biopsy biomarkers for predicting treatment response in mPCa. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Web of Science, and evidence-based websites for publications on circulating biomarkers in mPCa between March 2013 and February 2024 for review. Endpoints were: prediction of overall survival, biochemical or radiographic progression-free survival after treatment (chemotherapy, androgen deprivation therapy, androgen receptor pathway inhibitors [ARPIs], immunotherapy, or PARP inhibitors [PARPIs]). For each biomarker, the level of evidence (LOE) for clinical validity was attributed: LOE IA and IB, high level of evidence; LOE IIB and IIC, intermediate level; and LOE IIIC and LOE IV-VD, weak level. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The predictive value of each biomarker for the response to several therapies was evaluated in both metastatic hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) and castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In patients with mCRPC, BRCA1/2 or ATM mutations predicted response to ARPIs (LOE IB) and PARPIs (LOE IIB), while AR-V7 transcripts or AR-V7 protein levels in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) predicted response to ARPIs and taxanes (LOE IB). CTC quantification predicted response to cabazitaxel, abiraterone, and radium-223 (LOE IIB), while TP53 alterations predicted response to 177Lu prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand treatment (LOE IIB). AR copy number in circulating tumor DNA before the first treatment line and before subsequent lines predicted response to docetaxel, cabazitaxel, and ARPIs (LOE IIB). In mHSPC, DNA damage in lymphocytes was predictive of the response to radium-223 (LOE IIB). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: BRCA1/2, ATM, and AR alterations detected in liquid biopsies may help clinicians in management of patients with mPCa. The other circulating biomarkers did not reach the LOE required for routine clinical use and should be validated in prospective independent studies. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed studies assessing the value of biomarkers in blood or urine for management of metastatic prostate cancer. The evidence indicates that some biomarkers could help in selecting patients eligible for specific treatments.

PARP inhibitors in prostate cancers, is it time for combinations?

Despite several improvements in outcomes, metastatic prostate cancer remains deadly. Alterations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway are associated with more aggressive disease. Olaparib and rucaparib, two poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, have received approval from the authorities of several countries for their anti-tumoral effects in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers harboring HRR gene alterations, in particular BRCA2. More recently, it has been hypothesized that new hormonal therapies (NHTs) and PARP inhibitors (PARPi) could have synergistic actions and act independently of HRR deficiency. This review proposes to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of PARPi used as monotherapy or in combination with NHTs and whether there is a need for molecular selection.

Multidisciplinary real-world management of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: A French national study (PROFILE study).

While androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the standard of care for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), recent strategies like intensification of systemic treatment (Rozet et al., 2020) (i.e. adding another treatment to ADT) and radiotherapy have improved overall survival. PROFILE, a national retrospective multicentric real-world study, involved patients with mCSPC recruited by medical oncologists, urologists, and radiation oncologists, and who started treatment between November 2020 and May 2021. Patients by sites were included consecutively. Data were collected from medical records. Primary objectives were to: (1) describe retrospectively the characteristics of whole population of patients with mCSPC as well as subgroups defined by prognostic factors in France at diagnosis; (2) identify current practices for managing mCSPC in a real-life clinical setting. Among the 416 patients with mCSPC included in the PROFILE study, 315 (76%) were synchronous (metastasis at the initial diagnosis) and 101 (24%) were metachronous patients (metastasis diagnosed post-progression). A majority (83% of synchronous and 73% of metachronous patients) received an intensified systemic treatment (ADT plus ARSI [androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors]±chemotherapy±primary tumour radiotherapy±metastasis-directed therapy [MDT]), while only 40% of low-volume patients received prostate radiotherapy. This study depicts the standardization of new therapeutic strategies for patients with mCSPC in France with most of them receiving an intensified treatment, mainly with ADT+ARSI (64% of synchronous intensified patients and 76% of metachronous intensified patients). Most of patients were assessed using conventional imaging (CT scan and/or bone scan). Overall, PROFILE results are in line with French and European guidelines for diagnosis, management, and follow-up of such patients (Rozet et al., 2020; Cornford et al., 2021).

External validation and comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-based risk prediction models for prostate biopsy stratification.

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a promising tool for risk assessment, potentially reducing the burden of unnecessary prostate biopsies. Risk prediction models that incorporate MRI data have gained attention, but their external validation and comparison are essential for guiding clinical practice. The aim is to externally validate and compare risk prediction models for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). METHODS: A cohort of 4606 patients across fifteen European tertiary referral centers were identified from a prospective maintained database between January 2016 and April 2023. Transrectal or transperineal image-fusion MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies for PI-RADS score of ≥ 3 or ≥ 2 depending on patient characteristics and physician preferences. Probabilities for csPCa, defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade ≥ 2, were calculated for each patients using eight models. Performance was characterized by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and net benefit. Subgroup analyses were performed across various clinically relevant subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, csPCa was detected in 2154 (47%) patients. The models exhibited satisfactory performance, demonstrating good discrimination (AUC ranging from 0.75 to 0.78, p < 0.001), adequate calibration, and high net benefit. The model described by Alberts showed the highest clinical utility for threshold probabilities between 10 and 20%. Subgroup analyses highlighted variations in models' performance, particularly when stratified according to PSA level, biopsy technique and PI-RADS version. CONCLUSIONS: We report a comprehensive external validation of risk prediction models for csPCa diagnosis in patients who underwent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies. The model by Alberts demonstrated superior clinical utility and should be favored when determining the need for a prostate biopsy.

Outcomes after radical nephrectomy with vena cava thrombectomy using multidisciplinary approach: A single center experience.

INTRODUCTION: To describe the perioperative outcomes in patients treated with radical nephrectomy with cava thrombectomy at all thrombi levels using a multidisciplinary approach, with or without extracorporeal circulation (ECC), and to identify factors associated with perioperative morbidity. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 42 patients who were diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and a vena cava thrombus and treated with radical nephrectomy and cava thrombectomy by a double surgical team at Lyon University Hospital from 2008 through 2021. The surgeons operated in the cardiothoracic operating theater to proceed with median sternotomy or ECC, if necessary. The primary endpoint of this study was perioperative morbidity and mortality assessed using the Clavien-Dindo scale. Complications were recorded until 90 days after surgery, and those classified as grade IIIa or higher were considered high-grade complications. RESULTS: Overall, 32 (76%) patients required ECC. No intraoperative mortality occurred; however, two patients (5%) died within 30 days. Complications occurred within 30 days in 30 patients (72%), with severe complications observed in 10 patients (24%). No further complications occurred between 30 and 90 days. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, thrombus level, ECC, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, symptoms, and metastasis at presentation were not significantly associated with high-grade complications (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary approach is essential and frequent use of ECC, when achieved by a trained team, may facilitate surgery, and is associated with low perioperative morbidity, especially for patients with high-level thrombi. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

The impact of prostate volume estimation on the risk-adapted biopsy decision based on prostate-specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging score.

PURPOSE: Utility of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) for risk-stratification to avoid unnecessary biopsy remains unclear due to the lack of standardization of prostate volume estimation. We evaluated the impact of ellipsoidal formula using multiparametric magnetic resonance (MRI) and semi-automated segmentation using tridimensional ultrasound (3D-US) on prostate volume and PSAd estimations as well as the distribution of patients in a risk-adapted table of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). METHODS: In a prospectively maintained database of 4841 patients who underwent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies, 971 met inclusions criteria. Correlation of volume estimation was assessed by Kendall's correlation coefficient and graphically represented by scatter and Bland-Altman plots. Distribution of csPCa was presented using the Schoots risk-adapted table based on PSAd and PI-RADS score. The model was evaluated using discrimination, calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA). RESULTS: Median prostate volume estimation using 3D-US was higher compared to MRI (49cc[IQR 37-68] vs 47cc[IQR 35-66], p < 0.001). Significant correlation between imaging modalities was observed (τ = 0.73[CI 0.7-0.75], p < 0.001). Bland-Altman plot emphasizes the differences in prostate volume estimation. Using the Schoots risk-adapted table, a high risk of csPCa was observed in PI-RADS 2 combined with high PSAd, and in all PI-RADS 4-5. The risk of csPCa was proportional to the PSAd for PI-RADS 3 patients. Good accuracy (AUC of 0.69 and 0.68 using 3D-US and MRI, respectively), adequate calibration and a higher net benefit when using 3D-US for probability thresholds above 25% on DCA. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate volume estimation with semi-automated segmentation using 3D-US should be preferred to the ellipsoidal formula (MRI) when evaluating PSAd and the risk of csPCa.

Predicting contralateral extraprostatic extension in unilateral high-risk prostate cancer: a multicentric external validation study.

PURPOSE: Accurate prediction of extraprostatic extension (EPE) is crucial for decision-making in radical prostatectomy (RP), especially in nerve-sparing strategies. Martini et al. introduced a three-tier algorithm for predicting contralateral EPE in unilateral high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of the study is to externally validate this model in a multicentric European cohort of patients. METHODS: The data from 208 unilateral high-risk PCa patients diagnosed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and systematic biopsies, treated with RP between January 2016 and November 2021 at eight referral centers were collected. The evaluation of model performance involved measures such as discrimination (AUC), calibration, and decision-curve analysis (DCA) following TRIPOD guidelines. In addition, a comparison was made with two established multivariable logistic regression models predicting the risk of side specific EPE for assessment purposes. RESULTS: Overall, 38%, 48%, and 14% of patients were categorized as low, intermediate, and high-risk groups according to Martini et al.'s model, respectively. At final pathology, EPE on the contralateral prostatic lobe occurred in 6.3%, 12%, and 34% of patients in the respective risk groups. The algorithm demonstrated acceptable discrimination (AUC 0.68), comparable to other multivariable logistic regression models (p = 0.3), adequate calibration and the highest net benefit in DCA. The limitations include the modest sample size, retrospective design, and lack of central revision. CONCLUSION: Our findings endorse the algorithm's commendable performance, supporting its utility in guiding treatment decisions for unilateral high-risk PCa patients.

Preparing for the Worst: Management and Predictive Factors of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Renal Tumor Surgery (UroCCR-135 Study).

Background and objective: Data regarding open conversion (OC) during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for renal tumors are reported from big databases, without precise description of the reason and management of OC. The objective of this study was to describe the rate, reasons, and perioperative outcomes of OC in a cohort of patients who underwent MIS for renal tumor initially. The secondary objective was to find the factors associated with OC. Methods: Between 2008 and 2022, of the 8566 patients included in the UroCCR project prospective database (NCT03293563), who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted minimally invasive partial (MIPN) or radical (MIRN) nephrectomy, 163 experienced OC. Each center was contacted to enlighten the context of OC: "emergency OC" implied an immediate life-threatening situation not reasonably manageable with MIS, otherwise "elective OC". To evaluate the predictive factors of OC, a 2:1 paired cohort on the UroCCR database was used. Key findings and limitations: The incidence rate of OC was 1.9% for all cases of MIS, 2.9% for MIRN, and 1.4% for MIPN. OC procedures were mostly elective (82.2%). The main reason for OC was a failure to progress due to anatomical difficulties (42.9%). Five patients (3.1%) died within 90 d after surgery. Increased body mass index (BMI; odds ratio [OR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.09, p = 0.009) and cT stage (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.24-4.25, p = 0.008) were independent predictive factors of OC. Conclusions and clinical implications: In MIS for renal tumors, OC was a rare event (1.9%), caused by various situations, leading to impaired perioperative outcomes. Emergency OC occurred once every 300 procedures. Increased BMI and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC. Patient summary: The incidence rate of open conversion (OC) in minimally invasive surgery for renal tumors is low. Only 20% of OC procedures occur in case of emergency, and others are caused by various situations. Increased body mass index and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC.

Interest of the POSPOM score in estimating postoperative complication risk after radical cystectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying patients at risk after cystectomy for cancer is essential. The POSPOM score is a non-specific urological surgery score for estimating postoperative hospital mortality. This study sought to validate the POSPOM score for predicting postoperative morbidity and mortality after cystectomy. METHODS: The study retrospectively included all patients undergoing cystectomy for muscle-invasive or locally advanced bladder cancer between 2010 and 2019 in one center. The primary objective was validation of the POSPOM score for calculating severe postoperative morbidity [Clavien-Dindo (CDC)≥3] and 90-day mortality after cystectomy. Secondary objectives were comparison to other predictive scores [Charlson (CCI), ASA]. RESULTS: At 90days, out of 167 patients, 26% (n=44) had a CDC≥3 complication and 8.4% (n=14) had died. POSPOM correlated with the risk of death at 90days (P<0.001) and postoperative transfusion (P<0.01). Patients with CDC≥3 complications had higher CCI and POSPOM (median 6.5 vs. 5, P<0.01 and 6.49% vs. 5.58%, P=0.029, respectively). Patients who died postoperatively had higher CCI and POSPOM (median 8 vs. 6, P<0.001 and 23.9% vs. 5.58%, P<0.001, respectively). The prognostic value of the POSPOM score for predicting mortality appears better [AUC=0.886 (0.798-0.973)] compared with CCI [AUC=0.812 (0.710-0.915)] and ASA [AUC=0.739 (0.630-0.849)], but not for predicting morbidity. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the robustness of the POSPOM score for estimating mortality and its limitations for predicting postoperative morbidity.

Performance of a Region of Interest-based Algorithm in Diagnosing International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group ≥2 Prostate Cancer on the MRI-FIRST Database-CAD-FIRST Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows high sensitivity for International Society of Urological Pathology grade group (GG) ≥2 cancers. Many artificial intelligence algorithms have shown promising results in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer on MRI. To assess a region-of-interest-based machine-learning algorithm aimed at characterising GG ≥2 prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI. METHODS: The lesions targeted at biopsy in the MRI-FIRST dataset were retrospectively delineated and assessed using a previously developed algorithm. The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADSv2) score assigned prospectively before biopsy and the algorithm score calculated retrospectively in the regions of interest were compared for diagnosing GG ≥2 cancer, using the areas under the curve (AUCs), and sensitivities and specificities calculated with predefined thresholds (PIRADSv2 scores ≥3 and ≥4; algorithm scores yielding 90% sensitivity in the training database). Ten predefined biopsy strategies were assessed retrospectively. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: After excluding 19 patients, we analysed 232 patients imaged on 16 different scanners; 85 had GG ≥2 cancer at biopsy. At patient level, AUCs of the algorithm and PI-RADSv2 were 77% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 70-82) and 80% (CI: 74-85; p = 0.36), respectively. The algorithm's sensitivity and specificity were 86% (CI: 76-93) and 65% (CI: 54-73), respectively. PI-RADSv2 sensitivities and specificities were 95% (CI: 89-100) and 38% (CI: 26-47), and 89% (CI: 79-96) and 47% (CI: 35-57) for thresholds of ≥3 and ≥4, respectively. Using the PI-RADSv2 score to trigger a biopsy would have avoided 26-34% of biopsies while missing 5-11% of GG ≥2 cancers. Combining prostate-specific antigen density, the PI-RADSv2 and algorithm's scores would have avoided 44-47% of biopsies while missing 6-9% of GG ≥2 cancers. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and a lack of PI-RADS version 2.1 assessment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The algorithm provided robust results in the multicentre multiscanner MRI-FIRST database and could help select patients for biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: An artificial intelligence-based algorithm aimed at diagnosing aggressive cancers on prostate magnetic resonance imaging showed results similar to expert human assessment in a prospectively acquired multicentre test database.

Does Overgrading on Targeted Biopsy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-visible Lesions in Prostate Cancer Lead to Overtreatment?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Targeted biopsy of the index prostate cancer (PCa) lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is effective in reducing the risk of overdiagnosis of indolent PCa. However, it remains to be determined whether MRI-targeted biopsy can lead to a stage shift via overgrading of the index lesion by focusing only on the highest-grade component, and to a subsequent risk of overtreatment. Our aim was to assess whether overgrading on MRI-targeted biopsy may lead to overtreatment, using radical prostatectomy (RP) specimens as the reference standard. METHODS: Patients with clinically localized PCa who had positive MRI findings (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score ≥3) and Gleason grade group (GG) ≥2 disease detected on MRI-targeted biopsy were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database that records all RP procedures from eight referral centers. Biopsy grade was defined as the highest grade detected. Downgrading was defined as lower GG for the RP specimen than for MRI-targeted biopsy. Overtreatment was defined as downgrading to RP GG 1 for cases with GG ≥2 on biopsy, or to RP low-burden GG 2 for cases with GG ≥3 on biopsy. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 1020 consecutive biopsy-naïve patients with GG ≥2 PCa on MRI-targeted biopsy in the study. Pathological analysis of RP specimens showed downgrading in 178 patients (17%). The transperineal biopsy route was significantly associated with a lower risk of downgrading (odds ratio 0.364, 95% confidence interval 0.142-0.814; p = 0.022). Among 555 patients with GG 2 on targeted biopsy, only 18 (3.2%) were downgraded to GG 1 on RP. Among 465 patients with GG ≥3 on targeted biopsy, three (0.6%) were downgraded to GG 1 and seven were downgraded to low-burden GG 2 on RP. The overall risk of overtreatment due to targeted biopsy was 2.7% (28/1020). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our multicenter study revealed no strong evidence that targeted biopsy results could lead to a high risk of overtreatment.

Transperineal or Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A notable paradigm shift has emerged in the choice of prostate biopsy approach, with a transition from transrectal biopsy (TRBx) to transperineal biopsy (TPBx) driven by the lower risk of severe urinary tract infections. The impact of this change on detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) remains a subject of debate. Our aim was to compare the csPCa detection rate of TRBx and TPBx. METHODS: Patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and systematic biopsies for clinically localized PCa at 15 European referral centers from 2016 to 2023 were included. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection biases. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 3949 patients who met the study criteria, 2187 underwent TRBx and 1762 underwent TPBx. PSM resulted in 1301 matched pairs for analysis. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics were comparable in the matched cohorts. TPBx versus TRBx was associated with greater detection of csPCa, whether defined as International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2 (51% vs 45%; OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.63; p = 0.001) or grade group ≥3 (29% vs 23%; OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.13-1.67; p = 0.001). Similar results were found when considering MRI-targeted biopsy alone and after stratifying patients according to tumor location, Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System score, and clinical features. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and the absence of centralized MRI review. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings bolster existing understanding of the additional advantages offered by TPBx. Further randomized trials to fully validate these findings are awaited. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared the rate of detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsies in which the sample needle is passed through the perineum or the rectum. Our results suggest that the perineal approach is associated with better detection of aggressive prostate cancer.

Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Final Results of the Randomized PERFECT trial (CCAFU-PR1).

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines favor transperineal (TP) prostate biopsies over the transrectal (TR) approach due to a reduced sepsis risk. Yet, evidence from controlled trial comparing both approaches within the MRI-targeted pathway for significant prostate cancer (PCa) detection is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare the significant PCa detection rate between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted TR and TP approaches in biopsy-naïve patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this noninferiority controlled trial, we randomized (ratio 1:1) 270 MRI-positive biopsy-naïve patients. INTERVENTION: MRI-targeted TP versus TR biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The primary outcome was the detection rate of significant PCa (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] ≥2) in MRI-targeted biopsies. Secondary outcomes were any-grade PCa detection, detection on concomitant systematic biopsy, complications, and functional outcomes. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Targeted biopsies identified significant PCa in 47.2% of TP and 54.2% of TR participants (-7%, p = 0.6235). On a per-lesion analysis, posterior lesions yielded higher detection rates via TR (59.0% vs 44.3%, p = 0.0443), while anterior lesions were more frequently detected via TP (40.6% vs 26.5%, p = 0.2228). The overall (any grade) cancer detection rate in targeted biopsies was comparable between groups: 71.3% (TP) versus 64.1% (TR; p = 0.2209) with significantly more ISUP 1 cases detected in the TP arm. Adverse events of grade ≥2 were not different between TP (35.7%) and TR (40.5%, p = 0.4256). One TR patient (0.8%) experienced grade 3 sepsis. Quality of life, and urinary and sexual function, as well as pain scores, were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a comparable overall detection rate for any-grade PCa, noninferiority of TP over TR for MRI-targeted biopsies for significant PCa detection was not demonstrated. However, MRI lesion location influenced biopsy route performance, suggesting that a pragmatic approach based on lesion location might enhance significant PCa assessment. PATIENT SUMMARY: This trial compared the efficacy and safety of two biopsy approaches for prostate cancer diagnosis. Both approaches seem complementary according to the lesion location.

The Added Value of Side-specific Systematic Biopsy in Patients Diagnosed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Systematic biopsy (SB) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy is still recommended considering the risk of missing clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the added value in csPCa detection on side-specific SB relative to MRI lesion and to externally validate the Noujeim risk stratification model that predicts the risk of csPCa on distant SB cores relative to the index MRI lesion. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Overall, 4841 consecutive patients diagnosed by MRI-targeted biopsy and SB for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score ≥3 lesions were identified from a prospectively maintained database between January 2016 and April 2023 at 15 European referral centers. A total of 2387 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: McNemar's test was used to compare the csPCa detection rate between several biopsy strategies including MRI-targeted biopsy, side-specific SB, and a combination of both. Model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination using area under the receiver operation characteristic curve (AUC), calibration plots, and decision curve analysis. Clinically significant prostate cancer was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥2. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, the csPCa detection rate was 49%. Considering MRI-targeted biopsy as reference, the added values in terms of csPCa detection were 5.8% (relative increase of 13%), 4.2% (relative increase of 9.8%), and 2.8% (relative increase of 6.1%) for SB, ipsilateral SB, and contralateral SB, respectively. Only 35 patients (1.5%) exclusively had csPCa on contralateral SB (p < 0.001). Considering patients with csPCa on MRI-targeted biopsy and ipsilateral SB, the upgrading rate was 2% (20/961) using contralateral SB (p < 0.001). The Noujeim model exhibited modest performance (AUC of 0.63) when tested using our validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The added value of contralateral SB was negligible in terms of cancer detection and upgrading rates. The Noujeim model could be included in the decision-making process regarding the appropriate prostate biopsy strategy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the present study, we collected a set of patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and systematic biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. We found that biopsies taken at the opposite side of the MRI suspicious lesion have a negligible impact on cancer detection. We also validate a risk stratification model that predicts the risk of cancer on biopsies beyond 10 mm from the initial lesion, which could be used in daily practice to improve the personalization of the prostate biopsy.