The PRO-RCC study: a long-term PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort in the Netherlands, providing an infrastructure for 'Trial within Cohorts' study designs.

BACKGROUND: Ongoing research in the field of both localized, locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma has resulted in the availability of multiple treatment options. Hence, many questions are still unanswered and await further research. A nationwide collaborative registry allows to collect corresponding data. For this purpose, the Dutch PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort (PRO-RCC) has been founded, for the prospective collection of long-term clinical data, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs). METHODS: PRO-RCC is designed as a multicenter cohort for all Dutch patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recruitment will start in the Netherlands in 2023. Importantly, participants may also consent to participation in a 'Trial within cohorts' studies (TwiCs). The TwiCs design provides a method to perform (randomized) interventional studies within the registry. The clinical data collection is embedded in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Next to the standardly available data on RCC, additional clinical data will be collected. PROMS entail Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), symptom monitoring with optional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of pain and fatigue, and optional return to work- and/or nutrition questionnaires. PREMS entail satisfaction with care. Both PROMS and PREMS are collected through the PROFILES registry and are accessible for the patient and the treating physician. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical board approval has been obtained (2021_218) and the study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05326620). DISCUSSION: PRO-RCC is a nationwide long-term cohort for the collection of real-world clinical data, PROMS and PREMS. By facilitating an infrastructure for the collection of prospective data on RCC, PRO-RCC will contribute to observational research in a real-world study population and prove effectiveness in daily clinical practice. The infrastructure of this cohort also enables that interventional studies can be conducted with the TwiCs design, without the disadvantages of classic RCTs such as slow patient accrual and risk of dropping out after randomization.

Advances in radiotherapy and its impact on second primary cancer risk: A multi-center cohort study in prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Modelling studies suggest that advanced intensity-modulated radiotherapy may increase second primary cancer (SPC) risks, due to increased radiation exposure of tissues located outside the treatment fields. In the current study we investigated the association between SPC risks and characteristics of applied external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) protocols for localized prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: We collected EBRT protocol characteristics (2000-2016) from five Dutch RT institutes for the 3D-CRT and advanced EBRT era (N = 7908). From the Netherlands Cancer Registry we obtained patient/tumour characteristics, SPC data, and survival information. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) were calculated for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC. Nationwide SIRs were calculated as a reference, using calendar period as a proxy to label 3D-CRT/advanced EBRT. RESULTS: From 2000-2006, 3D-CRT with 68-78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, delivered with 10-23 MV and weekly portal imaging was the most dominant protocol. By the year 2010 all institutes routinely used advanced EBRT (IMRT, VMAT, tomotherapy), mainly delivering 78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, using various kV/MV imaging protocols. Sixteen percent (N = 1268) developed ≥ 1 SPC. SIRs for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC (all institutes, advanced EBRT vs 3D-CRT) were 1.17 (1.00-1.36) vs 1.39 (1.21-1.59), and 1.01 (0.89-1.07) vs 1.03 (0.94-1.13), respectively. Nationwide non-pelvis SIR was 1.07 (1.01-1.13) vs 1.02 (0.98-1.07). Other RT protocol characteristics did not correlate with SPC endpoints. CONCLUSION: None of the studied RT characteristics of advanced EBRT was associated with increased out-of-field SPC risks. With constantly evolving EBRT protocols, evaluation of associated SPC risks remains important.

Adherence to lifestyle recommendations after non-muscle invasive bladder cancer diagnosis and risk of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) are at a high risk of tumor recurrence. It has not been previously investigated if adherence to cancer prevention recommendations lowers the risk of recurrence. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether the standardized lifestyle score measuring adherence to the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) cancer prevention recommendations was associated with the risk of recurrence and progression among patients with NMIBC. METHODS: The study population included patients diagnosed with primary NMIBC between 2014 and 2017 from the prospective cohort UroLife. Lifestyle was assessed at baseline (n = 979; reflecting the prediagnosis period) and 3-mo postdiagnosis (n = 885). The standardized 2018 WCRF/AICR score was constructed based on recommendations for body weight, physical activity, diet, and alcohol intake. We computed multivariable-adjusted HRs and 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: During a median follow-up time of 3.7 y, 320 patients developed ≥1 recurrence(s) and 49 experienced progression. Patients in the highest compared with the lowest tertile of postdiagnosis WCRF/AICR scores had a lower risk of first bladder cancer recurrence (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.98). No associations were observed for multiple recurrences (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.70, 1.15) or for the baseline score with either first (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.82, 1.40) or multiple recurrences (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.82, 1.31). Improving lifestyle after diagnosis (per 1-point increase) was not significantly associated with the risk of first or multiple recurrence(s) (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.74, 1.02; HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.80, 1.08, respectively). No associations were observed for bladder cancer progression, but the power was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Better adherence to the WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations 3 mo after NMIBC diagnosis, but not before diagnosis, is associated with a decreased risk of first bladder cancer recurrence. More studies evaluating postdiagnosis lifestyles are needed to provide solid support for lifestyle recommendations for cancer survivors.

Radical prostatectomy versus deferred treatment for localised prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is a common cancer but is oftentimes slow growing. When confined to the prostate, radical prostatectomy (RP), which involves removal of the prostate, offers potential cure that may come at the price of adverse events. Deferred treatment, involving observation and palliative treatment only (watchful waiting (WW)) or close monitoring and delayed local treatment with curative intent as needed in the setting of disease progression (active monitoring (AM)/surveillance (AS)) might be an alternative. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2010. OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of RP compared with deferred treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library (including CDSR, CENTRAL, DARE, and HTA), MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, Web of Science, LILACS, Scopus, and OpenGrey. Additionally, we searched two trial registries and conference abstracts of three conferences (EAU, AUA, and ASCO) until 3 March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared RP versus deferred treatment in patients with localised prostate cancer, defined as T1-2, N0, M0 prostate cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of references and extracted data from included studies. The primary outcome was time to death from any cause; secondary outcomes were: time to death from prostate cancer; time to disease progression; time to metastatic disease; quality of life, including urinary and sexual function; and adverse events. We assessed the certainty of evidence per outcome using the GRADE approach.  MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies with 2635 participants (average age between 60 to 70 years). Three multicentre RCTs, from Europe and USA, compared RP with WW (n = 1537), and one compared RP with AM (n = 1098). Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting RP probably reduces the risk of death from any cause (hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.90; 3 studies with 1537 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on overall mortality at 29 years, this corresponds to 764 deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared to 839 deaths per 1000 men in the WW group. RP probably also lowers the risk of death from prostate cancer (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.44-0.73; 2 studies with 1426 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on prostate cancer-specific mortality at 29 years, this corresponds to 195 deaths from prostate cancer per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 316 deaths from prostate cancer per 1000 men in the WW group. RP may reduce the risk of progression (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.54; 2 studies with 1426 participants; I² = 54%; low-certainty evidence); at 19.5 years, this corresponds to 391 progressions per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 684 progressions per 1000 men for the WW group) and probably reduces the risk of developing metastatic disease (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.70; 2 studies with 1426 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence); at 29 years, this corresponds to 271 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for RP compared with 431 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for WW. General quality of life at 12 years' follow-up is probably similar for both groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.0, 95% CI 0.85-1.16; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 344  patients with high quality of life per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 344 patients with high quality of life per 1000 men for the WW group. Rates of urinary incontinence may be considerably higher (RR 3.97, 95% CI 2.34-6.74; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 173 incontinent men per 1000 in the RP group compared with 44 incontinent men per 1000 in the WW group, as are rates of erectile dysfunction (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.63-4.38; low-certainty evidence), corresponding to 389 erectile dysfunction events per 1000 for the RP group compared with 146 erectile dysfunction events per 1000 for the WW group, both at 10 years' follow-up. Radical prostatectomy versus active monitoring Based on one study including 1098 participants with 10 years' follow-up, there are probably no differences between RP and AM in time to death from any cause (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65-1.33; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on overall mortality at 10 years, this corresponds to 101 deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 108 deaths per 1000 men in the AM group. Similarly, risk of death from prostate cancer probably is not different between the two groups (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.21-1.89; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on prostate cancer-specific mortality at 10 years, this corresponds to nine prostate cancer deaths per 1000 men in the RP group compared with 15 prostate cancer deaths per 1000 men in the AM group. RP probably reduces the risk of progression (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27-0.56; moderate-certainty evidence; at 10 years, this corresponds to 86 progressions per 1000 men for RP compared with 206 progressions per 1000 men for AM) and the risk of developing metastatic disease (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21-0.73; moderate-certainty evidence; at 10 years, this corresponds to 24 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for the RP group compared with 61 metastatic diseases per 1000 men for the AM group).The general quality of life during follow-up was not different between the treatment groups. However, urinary function (mean difference (MD) 8.60 points lower, 95% CI 11.2-6.0 lower) and sexual function (MD 14.9 points lower, 95% CI 18.5-11.3 lower) on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26) instrument, were worse in the RP group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on long-term follow-up, RP compared with WW probably results in substantially improved oncological outcomes in men with localised prostate cancer but also markedly increases rates of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. These findings are largely based on men diagnosed before widespread PSA screening, thereby limiting generalisability. Compared to AM, based on follow-up to 10 years, RP probably has similar outcomes with regard to overall and disease-specific survival yet probably reduces the risks of disease progression and metastatic disease. Urinary function and sexual function are probably decreased for the patients treated with RP.

Real-world outcomes of radium-223 dichloride for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

Aim: Timing of radium-223 (Ra-223) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains challenging due to alternative options and short window of opportunity. Methods: Ra-223 treated patients in the CAPRI-registry were included. Outcomes were evaluated based on treatment line of Ra-223. Results: Out of 285 patients, 49% received Ra-223 in line ≥3. 51% completed six Ra-223 injections and 34% had a symptomatic skeletal event after first Ra-223 without differences between subgroups. After correction of known prognostic factors Ra-223 in line ≥3 (HR: 3.267; 95% CI: 1.689-6.317; p < 0.01) remained associated with worse OS. Conclusion: In the Netherlands, Ra-223 was mainly started as second or third mCRPC-treatment in 2014-2018. Later timing of Ra-223 did affect OS, but not treatment completion and occurrence of symptomatic skeletal events.

The UroLife study: protocol for a Dutch prospective cohort on lifestyle habits in relation to non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer prognosis and health-related quality of life.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) have a good survival but are at high risk for tumour recurrence and disease progression. It is important to identify lifestyle habits that may reduce the risk of recurrence and progression and improve health-related quality of life (HRQOL). This paper describes the rationale and design of the UroLife study. The main aim of this study is to evaluate whether lifestyle habits are related to prognosis and HRQOL in patients with NMIBC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The UroLife study is a multicentre prospective cohort study among more than 1100 newly diagnosed patients with NMIBC recruited from 22 hospitals in the Netherlands. At 6 weeks and 3, 15 and 51 months after diagnosis, participants fill out a general questionnaire, and questionnaires about their lifestyle habits and HRQOL. At 3, 15 and 51 months after diagnosis, information about fluid intake and micturition is collected with a 4-day diary. At 3 and 15 months after diagnosis, patients donate blood samples for DNA extraction and (dietary) biomarker analysis. Tumour samples are collected from all patients with T1 disease to assess molecular subtypes. Information about disease characteristics and therapy for the primary tumour and subsequent recurrences is collected from the medical records by the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Statistical analyses will be adjusted for age, gender, tumour characteristics and other known confounders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Committee for Human Research region Arnhem-Nijmegen (CMO 2013-494). Patients who agree to participate in the study provide written informed consent. The findings from our study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at (inter)national scientific meetings. Patients will be informed about the progress and results of this study through biannual newsletters and through the website of the study and of the bladder cancer patient association.

Common Genetic Variation in Circadian Rhythm Genes and Risk of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (EOC).

Disruption in circadian gene expression, whether due to genetic variation or environmental factors (e.g., light at night, shiftwork), is associated with increased incidence of breast, prostate, gastrointestinal and hematologic cancers and gliomas. Circadian genes are highly expressed in the ovaries where they regulate ovulation; circadian disruption is associated with several ovarian cancer risk factors (e.g., endometriosis). However, no studies have examined variation in germline circadian genes as predictors of ovarian cancer risk and invasiveness. The goal of the current study was to examine single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in circadian genes BMAL1, CRY2, CSNK1E, NPAS2, PER3, REV1 and TIMELESS and downstream transcription factors KLF10 and SENP3 as predictors of risk of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and histopathologic subtypes. The study included a test set of 3,761 EOC cases and 2,722 controls and a validation set of 44,308 samples including 18,174 (10,316 serous) cases and 26,134 controls from 43 studies participating in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium (OCAC). Analysis of genotype data from 36 genotyped SNPs and 4600 imputed SNPs indicated that the most significant association was rs117104877 in BMAL1 (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.68-0.90, p = 5.59 × 10-4]. Functional analysis revealed a significant down regulation of BMAL1 expression following cMYC overexpression and increasing transformation in ovarian surface epithelial (OSE) cells as well as alternative splicing of BMAL1 exons in ovarian and granulosa cells. These results suggest that variation in circadian genes, and specifically BMAL1, may be associated with risk of ovarian cancer, likely through disruption of hormonal pathways.