Tackling Diversity in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials: A Report From the Diversity Working Group of the IRONMAN Registry.

Prostate cancer disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minority populations. Reasons for disparate outcomes among minority patients are multifaceted and complex, involving factors at the patient, provider, and system levels. Although advancements in our understanding of disease biology have led to novel therapeutics for men with advanced prostate cancer, including the introduction of biomarker-driven therapeutics, pivotal translational studies and clinical trials are underrepresented by minority populations. Despite attempts to bridge the disparities gap, there remains an unmet need to expand minority engagement and participation in clinical trials to better define the impact of therapy on efficacy outcomes, quality of life, and role of biomarkers in diverse patient populations. The IRONMAN registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03151629), a global, prospective, population-based study, was borne from this unmet medical need to address persistent gaps in our knowledge of advanced prostate cancer. Through integrated collection of clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, epidemiologic data, and biospecimens, IRONMAN has the goal of expanding our understanding of how and why prostate cancer outcomes differ by race and ethnicity. To this end, the Diversity Working Group of the IRONMAN registry has developed informed strategies for site selection, recruitment, engagement and retention, and trial design and eligibility criteria to ensure broad inclusion and needs awareness of minority participants. In concert with systematic strategies to tackle the complex levels of disparate care, our ultimate goal is to expand minority engagement in clinical research and bridge the disparities gap in prostate cancer care.

Diversity of Enrollment in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials: Current Status and Future Directions.

BACKGROUND: Although there are considerable racial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer incidence and mortality in the United States and globally, clinical trials often do not reflect disease incidence across racial and ethnic subgroups. This study aims to comprehensively review the reporting of race and ethnicity data and the representation of race and ethnicity across prostate cancer treatment-, prevention-, and screening-based clinical trials. METHODS: Seventy-two global phase III and IV prevention, screening, and treatment prostate cancer clinical trials with enrollment start dates between 1987 and 2016 were analyzed in this study, representing a total of 893,378 individual trial participants. Availability and representation of race and ethnicity data by trial funding type, temporal changes in the racial/ethnic diversity of participants, and geographic representation of countries were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 72 trials analyzed, 59 (81.9%) had available race data, and 11 (15.3%) of these trials additionally reported ethnicity. Of the trials reporting data, participants were overwhelmingly white men (with the highest proportion in U.S. nonpublicly funded trials), comprising over 96% of the study population. The proportion of white participants in prostate cancer clinical trials has remained at over 80% since 1990. Geographically, Africa and the Caribbean were particularly underrepresented with only 3% of countries included. CONCLUSIONS: Trial participants continue to be majority white despite the known racial disparities in prostate cancer clinical outcomes. IMPACT: Current and future trials must use novel recruitment strategies to ensure enrollment of underrepresented men. Targeting the inclusion of African and Caribbean medical centers is crucial to achieve equity in representation.

Benefits of Supplemental Jejunostomy Tube Feeding During Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Locally Advanced, Potentially Resectable Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer includes neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection. However, many patients experience a period of decreased oral intake during neoadjuvant treatment and are at risk for malnutrition. We hypothesize that use of jejunostomy tube (j-tube) feedings during neoadjuvant therapy in selected patients may be associated with better perioperative outcomes. METHODS: A prospectively collected database at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. The study period was from 2005 to 2015. Patients who underwent j-tube placement before neoadjuvant therapy before definitive resection for esophageal cancer were included in the analysis. Perioperative outcomes were compared between patients who adhered to recommended tube feeds during neoadjuvant therapy (users) and patients who did not adhere (nonusers). RESULTS: During the study period, 94/301 patients received a j-tube before or during neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer. Seventy-three patients utilized tube feeds regularly during the neoadjuvant phase, while 21 patients did not. The groups did not differ significantly with respect to clinical factors such as dysphagia on presentation, postneoadjuvant therapy performance status, or Charlson Comorbidity Index. Perioperative pneumonia rates were lower in j-tube users compared to nonusers (6.8% [5 of 73] versus 23.8% [5 of 21]), respectively, P = .036); this difference remained significant with adjustment for type of surgery (odds ratio = 0.16, P = .018). CONCLUSIONS: j-Tube users had a significantly lower incidence of pneumonia within 30 days of curative resection when compared to nonusers. j-Tube feedings during neoadjuvant therapy for selected patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer should be encouraged.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Thymectomy for Thymic Malignancies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Complete resection is the standard of care for treatment of thymic malignancies. The use of minimally invasive surgery remains controversial. We searched online databases and identified studies from 1995 to 2014 that compared minimally invasive to open thymectomy for thymic malignancies. Study end points included operative blood loss, operative time, respiratory complications, cardiac complications, length of hospital stay, R0 resection, and recurrence. We summarized outcomes across studies using random-effects meta-analysis to account for study heterogeneity. We calculated ORs for binary outcomes and standardized mean differences for continuous outcomes. We calculated incidence rate ratios for the number of recurrences, accounting for total person-time observed in each study. Of 516 potential reference studies, 30 with a total of 2038 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients with Masaoka stage I or II thymic malignancy constituted 94.89% of those in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group and 78.62% of those in open thymectomy (open) group. Mean tumor size was 4.09 cm (MIS) versus 4.80 (open). Of the 1355 MIS cases, 32 were converted to open cases. Patients in the MIS group had significantly less blood loss; however, no significant differences in operating time, respiratory complications, cardiac complications, or overall complications were identified. Length of stay was shorter for patients in the MIS group. When patients with Masaoka stage I and II thymic malignancy only were analyzed, there was no difference in rate of R0 resection or overall recurrence rate. One postoperative death occurred in the open group. The results of this unadjusted meta-analysis of published reports comparing minimally invasive with open thymectomy suggest that in selected patients with thymic malignancy, minimally invasive thymectomy is safe and can achieve oncologic outcomes similar to those of open thymectomy.

A simple prediction score for developing a hospital-acquired infection after acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in acute ischemic stroke patients. Although prior scoring systems have been developed to predict pneumonia in ischemic stroke patients, these scores were not designed to predict other infections. We sought to develop a simple scoring system for any HAI. METHODS: Patients admitted to our stroke center (July 2008-June 2012) were retrospectively assessed. Patients were excluded if they had an in-hospital stroke, unknown time from symptom onset, or delay from symptom onset to hospital arrival greater than 48 hours. Infections were diagnosed via clinical, laboratory, and imaging modalities using standard definitions. A scoring system was created to predict infections based on baseline patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of 568 patients, 84 (14.8%) developed an infection during their stays. Patients who developed infection were older (73 versus 64, P < .0001), more frequently diabetic (43.9% versus 29.1%, P = .0077), and had more severe strokes on admission (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score 12 versus 5, P < .0001). Ranging from 0 to 7, the overall infection score consists of age 70 years or more (1 point), history of diabetes (1 point), and NIHSS score (0-4 conferred 0 points, 5-15 conferred 3 points, >15 conferred 5 points). Patients with an infection score of 4 or more were at 5 times greater odds of developing an infection (odds ratio, 5.67; 95% confidence interval, 3.28-9.81; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: In our sample, clinical, laboratory, and imaging information available at admission identified patients at risk for infections during their acute hospitalizations. If validated in other populations, this score could assist providers in predicting infections after ischemic stroke.