PIONEER big data platform for prostate cancer: lessons for advancing future real-world evidence research.

Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Enhancement through the Power of Big Data in Europe (PIONEER) is a European network of excellence for big data in prostate cancer. PIONEER brings together 34 private and public stakeholders from 9 countries in one multidisciplinary research consortium with the aim of positively transforming the field of prostate cancer clinical care by answering pressing questions related to prostate cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. PIONEER has developed a unique state-of-the-art big data analytic platform by integrating existing data sources from patients with prostate cancer. PIONEER leveraged this platform to address prioritized research questions, filling knowledge gaps in the characterization, management and core outcomes of prostate cancer across the different disease stages. The network has benefited from sustained patient and stakeholder involvement and engagement, but many challenges remain when using real-world data for big data projects. To continue to advance prostate cancer care, data need to be available, suitable methodologies should be selected and mechanisms for knowledge sharing must be in place. Now acting as the prostate cancer arm of the European Association of Urology's new endeavour, UroEvidenceHub, PIONEER maintains its goal of maximizing the potential of big data to improve prostate cancer care.

Mirabegron Versus Placebo and Other Therapeutic Modalities in the Treatment of Patients with Overactive Bladder Syndrome-A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of overactive bladder (OAB) increases with age. Mirabegron and other drugs are used for the management of patients with OAB. To evaluate mirabegron versus other treatments for overactive bladder syndrome (OAB). METHODS: This randomised controlled trial (RCT)-based systematic review (CRD42020200394) was conducted following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement, with standards reported in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 28 RCTs (n = 27 481 adults), comparing the following: mirabegron 25 mg versus placebo (n = 8798; six RCTs): significant changes in urgency urinary incontinence (mean difference [MD] -0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.56 to -0.26), total incontinence (MD -0.47, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.30), and nocturia (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.02), and mirabegron 50 mg versus placebo (n = 14 933; 12 RCTs): significant changes in urgency urinary incontinence (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.31), urgency (MD -0.49, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.33), total incontinence (MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.33), favouring mirabegron 25/50 mg; mirabegron 50 mg versus tolterodine 4 mg (n = 8008; five RCTs): significant changes in micturition (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.02) and overall adverse events (AEs; odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86), favouring mirabegron 50 mg; mirabegron 50 mg versus solifenacin 5 mg (n = 8911; four RCTs): significant changes in voided volume/micturition in millilitres (MD -7.77, 95% CI -12.93 to -2.61), favouring mirabegron 50 mg; and mirabegron 50 mg versus oxybutynin 73.5 mg (n = 302; one RCT): significant changes in overall AEs (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00-0.16), favouring mirabegron 50 mg. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Mirabegron is effective, safe, and well tolerated. Coadministration with anticholinergics provides an advantageous additive effect without a higher occurrence of side effects. PATIENT SUMMARY: Mirabegron is effective, safe, and well tolerated for treating overactive bladder. When used in conjunction with anticholinergic medications, it provides extra benefits without causing more side effects.

Influences on androgen deprivation therapy prescribing before surgery in high-risk prostate cancer.

Objectives: To understand how best to further reduce the inappropriate use of pre-surgical androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), we investigated the determinants (influences) of ADT prescribing in urologists in two European countries using an established behavioural science approach. Additionally, we sought to understand how resource limitations caused by COVID-19 influenced this practice. Identification of key determinants, of undistributed and disrupted practice, will aid development of future strategies to reduce inappropriate ADT prescribing in current and future resource-limited settings. Participants and Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with urologists practicing in Italy and the UK from February to July 2022. Interviews focussed on undisrupted (usual) practice and disrupted practice (changes made during COVID-19 restrictions). Codes were generated inductively and were mapped to the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. Relevant domains of influence were identified, and the similarities and differences between the UK and Italy were distinguished. Results: We identified 10 domains that were influential to ADT prescribing in the UK and eight in Italy. The role of guidance and evidence, the cancer care setting, the patients and the urologist's beliefs and experiences were identified as areas that were influential to ADT prescribing before surgery. Twenty-one similarities and 22 differences between the UK and Italy, for usual and COVID-19 practice, were identified across these 10 domains. Conclusion: Similarities and differences influencing ADT prescribing prior to surgery should be considered in behavioural strategy development and tailoring to reduce inappropriate ADT use. We gained an understanding of usual, undistributed care and resource-limited or disrupted care due to COVID-19 in two European countries. This gives an indication of how influences on ADT prescribing may change in future resource-limited circumstances and where efforts can be focused now and in future.

Specifying behavioural and strategy components of de-implementation efforts targeting low-value prescribing practices in secondary health care.

BACKGROUND: /Aims De-implementation, including the removal or reduction of unnecessary or inappropriate prescribing, is crucial to ensure patients receive appropriate evidence-based health care. The utilization of de-implementation efforts is contingent on the quality of strategy reporting. To further understand effective ways to de-implement medical practices, specification of behavioural targets and components of de-implementation strategies are required. This paper aims to critically analyse how well the behavioural targets and strategy components, in studies that focused on de-implementing unnecessary or inappropriate prescribing in secondary healthcare settings, were reported. METHODS: A supplementary analysis of studies included in a recently published review of de-implementation studies was conducted. Article text was coded verbatim to two established specification frameworks. Behavioural components were coded deductively to the five elements of the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time (AACTT) framework. Strategy components were mapped to the nine elements of the Proctor's 'measuring implementation strategies' framework. RESULTS: The behavioural components of low-value prescribing, as coded to the AACTT framework, were generally specified well. However, the Actor and Time components were often vague or not well reported. Specification of strategy components, as coded to the Proctor framework, were less well reported. Proctor's Actor, Action target: specifying targets, Dose and Justification elements were not well reported or varied in the amount of detail offered. We also offer suggestions of additional specifications to make, such as the 'interactions' participants have with a strategy. CONCLUSION: Specification of behavioural targets and components of de-implementation strategies for prescribing practices can be accommodated by the AACTT and Proctor frameworks when used in conjunction. These essential details are required to understand, replicate and successfully de-implement unnecessary or inappropriate prescribing. In general, standardisation in the reporting quality of these components is required to replicate any de-implementation efforts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not registered.

Research protocol for an observational health data analysis to assess the applicability of randomized controlled trials focusing on newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer using real-world data: PIONEER IMI's "big data for better outcomes" program.

Background: Metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) constitutes ~5% of all new PCa diagnoses in Western countries. For most cases, primary consideration should be given to systemic therapies as the first-line approach based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Despite the importance of RCTs as the pinnacle of evidence in modern medicine, concerns have been raised about their applicability to real-life scenarios. These trials often feature participants who are younger with better performance statuses and prognoses compared to their real-world counterparts. The PIONEER project falls under the Innovative Medicine Initiative's (IMI) "Big Data for Better Outcomes" initiative, aimed at revolutionizing PCa care in Europe. The central focus lies in improving cancer-related outcomes, enhancing health system efficiency, and elevating the quality of health and social care. This study endeavours to evaluate the generalizability of RCT findings concerning newly diagnosed metastatic PCa. Methods: A systematic review of the literature will be conducted to compile patient characteristics from RCTs addressing this subject within the past decade. To create a real-world benchmark, patients with recently diagnosed metastatic PCa from a network of population-based databases will serve as a comparison group. The objective is to assess the applicability of RCT results in two ways. First, a comparison will be made between the characteristics of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic PCa enroled in RCTs and those with the same condition included in our databases which might represent the real-world setting. Second, an evaluation will be undertaken to determine the proportion of real-world patients with newly diagnosed metastatic PCa who meet the criteria for RCT enrolment. This study will rely on extensive observational data, primarily sourced from population-based registries, electronic health records, and insurance claims data. The study cohort is established upon routinely gathered healthcare data, meticulously mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model.

Gambian Mothers Lack Obstetric Danger Sign Knowledge, But Educational Intervention Shows Promise.

Background: The Gambia has the 12th highest maternal mortality rate in the world, with 80% of deaths resulting from avoidable causes. Unawareness of pregnancy danger signs (DS) has been shown to be a barrier to seeking obstetric care, while app-based education intervention has shown promise. Objective: We aim to assess patient awareness of DS, identify barriers to awareness, and evaluate potential for implementing smartphone-based technologies for education. Methods: A cross-sectional semi-structured survey was administered to Gambian women (n = 100) across five hospitals/health centers. Data and informed consent were collected via an online survey portal. Analysis included bivariate analysis and descriptive statistics with p < 0.05 significance level. Recall of 0-2 DS per category was classified as "low" knowledge, 3-5 as "moderate" knowledge, and 6+ as "sufficient" knowledge. Cross-category recall was quantified for overall awareness level (0-6 = "low", 7-12 = "moderate", 13+ = "sufficient". N = 28 total DS). Findings: Although 75% of participants (n = 100) self-perceived "sufficient" knowledge of DS, the average recall was only two (SD = 2, n = 11) pregnancy DS, one labor and delivery DS (SD = 1, n = 8), and one postpartum DS (SD = 1, n = 9). Twenty-one women were unable to recall any danger signs. "Low" awareness was identified in 77% of women, while 23%, and 0% of women showed "moderate" and "sufficient" overall awareness, respectively. Education level was significantly correlated with overall danger sign recall (ρ(98) = .243, p = .015) and awareness level (ρ(98) = .265, p = .008). Monthly income was significantly correlated with awareness level (ρ(97) = .311, p = .002). Smartphone ownership was reported by 76% of women, and 97% expressed interest in using app-based video (94%) or provider (93%) teaching. Conclusions: Women had low knowledge of obstetric danger signs, and true awareness of danger signs was remarkably lower than self-perceived knowledge. However, patients exhibited proper healthcare-seeking behavior when danger signs arose. Findings suggest that video- or messaging-based education from local healthcare providers may be effective DS educational interventions.

Research Protocol for an Observational Health Data Analysis on the Adverse Events of Systemic Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Big Data Analytics Using the PIONEER Platform.

Combination therapies in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), which include the addition of an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor and/or docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy, have been a game changer in the management of this disease stage. However, these therapies come with their fair share of toxicities and side effects. The goal of this observational study is to report drug-related adverse events (AEs), which are correlated with systemic combination therapies for mHSPC. Determining the optimal treatment option requires large cohorts to estimate the tolerability and AEs of these combination therapies in "real-life" patients with mHSPC, as provided in this study. We use a network of databases that includes population-based registries, electronic health records, and insurance claims, containing the overall target population and subgroups of patients defined by unique certain characteristics, demographics, and comorbidities, to compute the incidence of common AEs associated with systemic therapies in the setting of mHSPC. These data sources are standardised using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model. We perform the descriptive statistics as well as calculate the AE incidence rate separately for each treatment group, stratified by age groups and index year. The time until the first event is estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method within each age group. In the case of episodic events, the anticipated mean cumulative counts of events are calculated. Our study will allow clinicians to tailor optimal therapies for mHSPC patients, and they will serve as a basis for comparative method studies.

Improving Patient Information and Enhanced Consent in Urology: The Impact of Simulation and Multimedia Tools. A Systematic Literature Review from the European Association of Urology Patient Office.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Discussions surrounding urological diagnoses and planned procedures can be challenging, and patients might experience difficulty in understanding the medical language, even when shown radiological imaging or drawings. With the introduction of virtual reality and simulation, informed consent could be enhanced by audiovisual content and interactive platforms. Our aim was to assess the role of enhanced consent in the field of urology. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, using informed consent, simulation, and virtual reality in urology as the search terms. All original articles were screened. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Thirteen original studies were included in the review. The overall quality of these studies was deemed good according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The studies analysed the application of different modalities for enhanced consent: 3D printed or digital models, audio visual multimedia contents, virtual simulation of procedures and interactive navigable apps. Published studies agreed upon a significantly improved effect on patient understanding of the diagnosis, including basic anatomical details, and surgery-related issues such as the aim, steps and the risks connected to the planned intervention. Patient satisfaction was unanimously reported as improved as a result of enhanced consent. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Simulation and multimedia tools are extremely valuable for improving patients' understanding of and satisfaction with urological procedures. Widespread application of enhanced consent would represent a milestone for patient-urologist communication. PATIENT SUMMARY: Several multimedia tools can be used to improve patients' understanding of urological conditions and procedures, such as simulation and models. Use of these tools for preoperative discussion enhances knowledge and patient satisfaction, resulting in more realistic patient expectations and better informed consent.

Predictive Models for Assessing Patients' Response to Treatment in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Background and objective: The treatment landscape of metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) has evolved significantly over the past two decades. Despite this, the optimal therapy for patients with mPCa has not been determined. This systematic review identifies available predictive models that assess mPCa patients' response to treatment. Methods: We critically reviewed MEDLINE and CENTRAL in December 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Only quantitative studies in English were included with no time restrictions. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the PROBAST tool. Data were extracted following the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews criteria. Key findings and limitations: The search identified 616 citations, of which 15 studies were included in our review. Nine of the included studies were validated internally or externally. Only one study had a low risk of bias and a low risk concerning applicability. Many studies failed to detail model performance adequately, resulting in a high risk of bias. Where reported, the models indicated good or excellent performance. Conclusions and clinical implications: Most of the identified predictive models require additional evaluation and validation in properly designed studies before these can be implemented in clinical practice to assist with treatment decision-making for men with mPCa. Patient summary: In this review, we evaluate studies that predict which treatments will work best for which metastatic prostate cancer patients. We found that existing studies need further improvement before these can be used by health care professionals.

How Can We Improve Patient-Clinician Communication for Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer?

Background and objective: The ability of health care professionals to communicate with patients compassionately and effectively is crucial for shared decision-making, but little research has investigated patient-clinician communication. As part of PIONEER-an international Big Data Consortium led by the European Association of Urology to answer key questions for men with prostate cancer (PCa), funded through the IMI2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement 777492- we investigated communication between men diagnosed with PCa and the health care professional(s) treating them across Europe. Methods: We used the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Communication 26, which was shared via the PIONEER and patient organisations on March 11, 2022. We sought men who spoke French, Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch, or English who were diagnosed with PCa and were undergoing or had already received treatment for their PCa. Results and limitations: A total of 372 men reported that they communicated with their clinician during either the diagnostic or the treatment period. Overall, the majority of participants reported positive experiences. However, important opportunities to enhance communication were identified, particularly with regard to correcting misunderstandings, understanding the patient's preferred approach to information presentation, addressing challenging questions, supporting the patient's comprehension of information, attending to the patient's emotional needs, and assessing what information had already been given to patients about their disease and treatment, and how much of it was understood. Conclusions and clinical implications: These results help us to identify gaps and barriers to shared treatment decision making. This knowledge will help devise measures to improve patient-health care professional communication in the PCa setting. Patient summary: As part of the PIONEER initiative, we investigated the communication between men diagnosed with prostate cancer and their health care professionals across Europe. A total of 372 men from six different countries participated in the study. Most participants reported positive experiences, but areas where communication could be improved were identified. These included addressing misunderstandings, tailoring the presentation of information to the patient's preferences, handling difficult questions, supporting emotional needs, and assessing the patient's understanding of their diagnosis and treatment.

ESRU-ESU-YAU_UROTECH Survey on Urology Residents Surgical Training: Are We Ready for Simulation and a Standardized Program?

Background: Currently, the landscape of surgical training is undergoing rapid evolution, marked by the initial implementation of standardized surgical training programs, which are further facilitated by the emergence of new technologies. However, this proliferation is uneven across various countries and hospitals. Objective: To offer a comprehensive overview of the existing surgical training programs throughout Europe, with a specific focus on the accessibility of simulation resources and standardized surgical programs. Design setting and participants: A dedicated survey was designed and spread in May 2022 via the European Association of Urology (EAU) mail list, to Young Urologist Office (YUO), Junior membership, European Urology Residents Education Program participants between 2014 and 2022, and other urologists under 40 yr, and via the EAU Newsletter. Intervention: A 64-item, online-based survey in accordance with the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) using the platform of Survey Monkey (Portland, OR, USA) was realized. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The study involved an assessment of the demographic characteristics. Additionally, it explored the type of center, availability of various surgical approaches, presence of training infrastructure, participation in courses, organization of training, and participants' satisfaction with the training program. The level of satisfaction was evaluated using a Likert-5 scale. The subsequent sections delved into surgical training within the realms of open, laparoscopic, robotic, and endoscopic surgery, each explored separately. Finally, the investigation encompassed the presence of a structured training course and the availability of a duly validated final evaluation process. Results and limitations: There were 375 responders with a completion rate of 82%. Among them, 75% were identified as male, 50.6% were young urologists, 31.7% were senior residents, and 17.6% were junior residents. A significant majority of participants (69.6%) were affiliated with academic centers. Regarding the presence of dry lab training facilities, only 50.3% of respondents indicated its availability. Among these centers, 46.7% were primarily focused on laparoscopy training. The availability of virtual and wet lab training centers was even more limited, with rates of 31.5% and 16.2%, respectively. Direct patient involvement was reported in 80.5% of cases for open surgery, 58.8% for laparoscopy, 25.0% for robotics, and 78.6% for endourology. It is worth noting that in <25% of instances, training followed a well-defined standardized program comprising both preclinical and clinical modular phases. Finally, the analysis of participant feedback showed that 49.7% of respondents expressed a satisfaction rating of either 4 or 5 points with respect to the training program. The limitations of our study include the low response rate, predominance of participants from academic centers, and absence of responses from individuals not affiliated with the EAU network. Conclusions: The current distribution of surgical training centers falls short of ensuring widespread access to standardized training programs. Although dry lab facilities are relatively well spread, the availability of wet lab resources remains restricted. Additionally, it appears that many trainees' initial exposure to surgery occurs directly with patients. There is a pressing need for continued endeavors to establish uniform training routes and assessment techniques across various surgical methodologies. Patient summary: Nowadays, the surgical training landscape is heterogeneous across different countries. The implementation of a standardized training methodology to enhance the overall quality of surgical training and thereby improving patient outcomes is needed.

Three-year cost utility analysis of mini versus standard slings: A trial based economic evaluation.

Objective: To report on the cost-effectiveness of adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings (mini-slings) compared with tension-free standard mid-urethral slings (standard slings) in the surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Patients and Methods: Data on resource use and quality were collected from women aged ≥18 years with predominant SUI undergoing mid-urethral sling procedures in 21 UK hospitals. Resource use and quality of life (QoL) data were prospectively collected alongside the Single-Incision Mini-Slings versus standard synthetic mid-urethral slings Randomised Control Trial (SIMS RCT), for surgical treatment of SUI in women. A health service provider's (National Health Service [NHS]) perspective with 3-year follow-up was adopted to estimate the costs of the intervention and all subsequent resource use. A generic instrument, EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, was used to estimate the QoL. Results are reported as incremental costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY. Results: Base case analysis results show that although mini-slings cost less, there was no significant difference in costs: mini-slings versus standard slings: £-6 [95% CI -228-208] or in QALYs: 0.005 [95% CI -0.068-0.073] over the 3-year follow-up. There is substantial uncertainty, with a 56% and 44% probability that mini-slings and standard slings are the most cost-effective treatment, respectively, at a £20 000 willingness-to-pay threshold value for a QALY. Conclusions: At 3 years, there is no significant difference between mini-slings and standard slings in costs and QALYs. There is still some uncertainty over the long-term complications and failure rates of the devices used in the treatment of SUI; therefore, it is important to establish the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of these procedures.

Clinical Characterization of Patients Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer and Undergoing Conservative Management: A PIONEER Analysis Based on Big Data.

BACKGROUND: Conservative management is an option for prostate cancer (PCa) patients either with the objective of delaying or even avoiding curative therapy, or to wait until palliative treatment is needed. PIONEER, funded by the European Commission Innovative Medicines Initiative, aims at improving PCa care across Europe through the application of big data analytics. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of PCa patients on conservative management by using an international large network of real-world data. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From an initial cohort of >100 000 000 adult individuals included in eight databases evaluated during a virtual study-a-thon hosted by PIONEER, we identified newly diagnosed PCa cases (n = 527 311). Among those, we selected patients who did not receive curative or palliative treatment within 6 mo from diagnosis (n = 123 146). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patient and disease characteristics were reported. The number of patients who experienced the main study outcomes was quantified for each stratum and the overall cohort. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate the distribution of time to event data. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The most common comorbidities were hypertension (35-73%), obesity (9.2-54%), and type 2 diabetes (11-28%). The rate of PCa-related symptomatic progression ranged between 2.6% and 6.2%. Hospitalization (12-25%) and emergency department visits (10-14%) were common events during the 1st year of follow-up. The probability of being free from both palliative and curative treatments decreased during follow-up. Limitations include a lack of information on patients and disease characteristics and on treatment intent. CONCLUSIONS: Our results allow us to better understand the current landscape of patients with PCa managed with conservative treatment. PIONEER offers a unique opportunity to characterize the baseline features and outcomes of PCa patients managed conservatively using real-world data. PATIENT SUMMARY: Up to 25% of men with prostate cancer (PCa) managed conservatively experienced hospitalization and emergency department visits within the 1st year after diagnosis; 6% experienced PCa-related symptoms. The probability of receiving therapies for PCa decreased according to time elapsed after the diagnosis.

Effectiveness of de-implementation strategies for low-value prescribing in secondary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Considerable efforts have been made to improve guideline adherence in healthcare through de-implementation, such as decreasing the prescription of inappropriate medicines. However, we have limited knowledge about the effectiveness, barriers, facilitators and consequences of de-implementation strategies targeting inappropriate medication prescribing in secondary care settings. This review was conducted to understand these factors to contribute to better replication and optimisation of future de-implementation efforts to reduce low-value care. METHODS: A systematic review of randomised control trials was conducted. Papers were identified through CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane register of controlled trials to February 2021. Eligible studies were randomised control trials evaluating behavioural strategies to de-implement inappropriate prescribing in secondary healthcare. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Intervention characteristics, effectiveness, barriers, facilitators and consequences were identified in the study text and tabulated. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included, of which seven were reported as effectively de-implementing low-value prescribing. Included studies were judged to be mainly at low to moderate risk for selection biases and generally high risk for performance and reporting biases. The majority of these strategies were clinical decision support at the 'point of care'. Clinical decision support tools were the most common and effective. They were found to be a low-cost and simple strategy. However, barriers such as clinician's reluctance to accept recommendations, or the clinical setting were potential barriers to their success. Educational strategies were the second most reported intervention type however the utility of educational strategies for de-implementation remains varied. Multiple barriers and facilitators relating to the environmental context, resources and knowledge were identified across studies as potentially influencing de-implementation. Various consequences were identified; however, few measured the impact of de-implementation on usual appropriate practice. CONCLUSION: This review offers insight into the intervention strategies, potential barriers, facilitators and consequences that may affect the de-implementation of low-value prescribing in secondary care. Identification of these key features helps understand how and why these strategies are effective and the wider (desirable or undesirable) impact of de-implementation. These findings can contribute to the successful replication or optimisation of strategies used to de-implement low-value prescribing practices in future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021243944).

Patient preferences for stress urinary incontinence treatments: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit and value patient preferences for the processes and outcomes of surgical management of stress urinary incontinence in women. DESIGN: A discrete choice experiment survey to elicit preferences for type of anaesthesia, postoperative recovery time, treatment success, adverse events, impact on daily activities and cost. An experimental design generated 40 choice tasks, and each respondent completed 1 block of 10 and 2 validity tests. Analysis was by multinomial logistical regression. SETTING: N=21 UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: N=325 adult women who were a subsample of those randomised to the single-incision mini-slings clinical trial. OUTCOMES: Patient preferences; valuation obtained using willingness to pay. RESULTS: N=227 of 325 (70%) returned a questionnaire, and 94% of those completed all choice tasks. Respondents preferred general anaesthesia, shorter recovery times, improved stress urinary incontinence symptoms and avoidance of adverse events. Women were willing to pay (mean (95% CI)) £76 (£33 to £119) per day of reduction in recovery time following surgery. They valued increases in Patient Global Impression of Improvement, ranging from £8173 (£5459 to £10 887) for 'improved' to £11 706 (£8267 to £15 144) for 'very much improved' symptoms, compared with no symptom improvement. This was offset by negative values attached to the avoidance of complications ranging between £-8022 (£-10 661 to £-5383) and £-10 632 (£-14 077 to £-7187) compared to no complications. Women valued treatments that reduced the need to avoid daily activities, with willingness to pay ranging from £-967 (£-2199 to £266) for rarely avoiding activities to £-5338 (£-7258 to £-3417) for frequently avoiding daily activities compared with no avoidance. CONCLUSION: This discrete choice experiment demonstrates that patients place considerable value on improvement in stress urinary incontinence symptoms and avoidance of treatment complications. Trade-offs between symptom improvement and adverse event risk should be considered within shared decision-making. The willingness to pay values from this study can be used in future cost-benefit analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: 93264234; Post-results.

Unanswered questions in prostate cancer - findings of an international multi-stakeholder consensus by the PIONEER consortium.

PIONEER is a European network of excellence for big data in prostate cancer consisting of 37 private and public stakeholders from 9 countries across Europe. Many progresses have been done in prostate cancer management, but unanswered questions in the field still exist, and big data could help to answer these questions. The PIONEER consortium conducted a two-round modified Delphi survey aiming at building consensus between two stakeholder groups - health-care professionals and patients with prostate cancer - about the most important questions in the field of prostate cancer to be answered using big data. Respondents were asked to consider what would be the effect of answering the proposed questions on improving diagnosis and treatment outcomes for patients with prostate cancer and to score these questions on a scale of 1 (not important) to 9 (critically important). The mean percentage of participants who scored each of the proposed questions as critically important was calculated across the two stakeholder groups and used to rank the questions and identify the highest scoring questions in the critically important category. The identification of questions in prostate cancer that are important to various stakeholders will help the PIONEER consortium to provide answers to these questions to improve the clinical care of patients with prostate cancer.

Mapping European Association of Urology Guideline Practice Across Europe: An Audit of Androgen Deprivation Therapy Use Before Prostate Cancer Surgery in 6598 Cases in 187 Hospitals Across 31 European Countries.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-practice gaps exist in urology. We previously surveyed European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for strong recommendations underpinned by high-certainty evidence that impact patient experience for which practice variations were suspected. The recommendation "Do not offer neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) before surgery for patients with prostate cancer" was prioritised for further investigation. ADT before surgery is neither clinically effective nor cost effective and has serious side effects. The first step in improving implementation problems is to understand their extent. A clear picture of practice regarding ADT before surgery across Europe is not available. OBJECTIVE: To assess current ADT use before prostate cancer surgery in Europe. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was an observational cross-sectional study. We retrospectively audited recent ADT practices in a multicentre international setting. We used nonprobability purposive sampling, aiming for breadth in terms of low- versus high-volume, academic, versus community and public versus private centres. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Our primary outcome was adherence to the ADT recommendation. Descriptive statistics and a multilevel model were used to investigate differences between countries across different factors (volume, centre type, and funding type). Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with low, intermediate, and high risk, and for those with locally advanced prostate cancer. We also collected reasons for nonadherence. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 6598 patients with prostate cancer from 187 hospitals in 31 countries from January 1, 2017 to May 1, 2020. Overall, nonadherence was 2%, (range 0-32%). Most of the variability was found in the high-risk subgroup, for which nonadherence was 4% (range 0-43%). Reasons for nonadherence included attempts to improve oncological outcomes or preoperative tumour parameters; attempts to control the cancer because of long waiting lists; and patient preference (changing one's mind from radiotherapy to surgery after neoadjuvant ADT had commenced or feeling that the side effects were intolerable). Although we purposively sampled for variety within countries (public/private, academic/community, high/low-volume), a selection bias toward centres with awareness of guidelines is possible, so adherence rates may be overestimated. CONCLUSIONS: EAU guidelines recommend against ADT use before prostate cancer surgery, yet some guideline-discordant ADT use remains at the cost of patient experience and an additional payer and provider burden. Strategies towards discontinuation of inappropriate preoperative ADT use should be pursued. PATIENT SUMMARY: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is sometimes used in men with prostate cancer who will not benefit from it. ADT causes side effects such as weight gain and emotional changes and increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis. Guidelines strongly recommend that men opting for surgery should not receive ADT, but it is unclear how well the guidance is followed. We asked urologists across Europe how patients in their institutions were treated over the past few years. Most do not use ADT before surgery, but this still happens in some places. More research is needed to help doctors to stop using ADT in patients who will not benefit from it.