Salvage Cryoablation for Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Primary External Beam Radiotherapy or Primary Cryotherapy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of Mid-term Oncologic and Functional Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Local prostate cancer recurrence following radiotherapy (XRT) or cryoablation (CRYO) may be addressed with salvage cryotherapy (SCT), although little is known about how the primary treatment modality affects SCT results. Oncologic and functional outcomes of patients who underwent SCT after primary XRT (XRT-SCT) or cryoablation (CRYO-SCT) were studied. METHODS: Data was collected using the Duke Prostate Cancer database and the Cryo On-Line Data (COLD) registry. The primary outcome was biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS).  Urinary incontinence, rectourethral fistula, and erectile dysfunction were secondary outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier log-rank test and univariable/multivariable Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models were utilized to evaluate BPFS between groups. RESULTS: 419 XRT-SCT and 63 CRYO-SCT patients met inclusion criteria, that was reduced to 63 patients in each cohort after propensity matching. There was no difference in BPFS at 2 and 5 years both before (P = .5 and P = .7) and after matching (P = .6 and P = .3). On multivariable CPH, BPFS was comparable between treatment groups (CRYO-SCT, HR=1.1, [0.2-2.2]).  On the same analysis, BPFS was lower in D'Amico high-risk (HR 3.2, P < .01) and intermediate-risk (HR 1.95, P < .05) categories compared to low-risk. There was no significant difference in functional outcomes between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Following primary cryotherapy, salvage cryoablation provides comparable intermediate oncological outcomes and functional outcomes compared to primary radiotherapy.

Safety of repeat blue light cystoscopy with hexaminolevulinate (HAL) in the management of bladder cancer: Results from a phase III, comparative, multi-center study.

PURPOSE: The therapeutic benefit of intravesical instillation of hexaminolevulinate (HAL) at the time of transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) has been demonstrated in multiple studies. The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess the safety of repeated administration of HAL from a phase III pre-trial planned analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients evaluated in the study received at least 1 dose of HAL at the time of office cystoscopy, and a subset of these patients (n = 103, 33.2%) received a second dose a few weeks later at the time of TURBT. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded, and the safety of repeat use of HAL was determined by comparing the proportion of patients with AEs considered causally related to HAL in the surveillance examination compared to the OR examination. Association between categorical variables was tested using Fisher's Exact Test, and a P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: HAL-related AEs were experienced by 6 patients (2.2%) during surveillance cystoscopy and 3 patients (3.4%) following TURBT (P = 0.76); 181 patients (59.5%) had prior exposure to HAL before enrolling in the study with no difference in the number of AEs when comparing prior exposure to HAL to no prior exposure (P = 0.76). Of the patients who previously received intravesical therapy, 8 (2.9%) had at least 1 AE during surveillance compared to 3 (9.7%) who had no prior intravesical therapy (P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat use of HAL is safe even when administered within a few weeks of receiving a dose of intravesical therapy.

Service line care delivery model for COVID-19 patient-centric care.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused hospitals around the world to quickly develop not only strategies to treat patients but also methods to protect health care and frontline workers. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive study. METHODS: We outlined the steps and processes that we took to respond to the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic while continuing to provide our routine acute care services to our community. RESULTS: These steps and processes included establishing teams focused on maintaining an adequate supply of personal protection equipment, cross-training staff, developing disaster-based triage for the emergency department, creating quality improvement teams geared toward updating care based on the most current literature, developing COVID-19-based units, creating COVID-19-specific teams of providers, maximizing use of our electronic health record system to allocate beds, and providing adequate practitioner coverage by creating a computer-based dashboard that indicated the need for health care practitioners. These processes led to seamless and integrated care for all patients with COVID-19 across our health system and resulted in a reduction in mortality from a high of 20% during the first peak (March and April 2020) to 6% during the plateau period (June-October 2020) to 12% during the second peak (November and December 2020). CONCLUSIONS: The detailed processes put in place will help hospital systems meet the continuing challenges not only of COVID-19 but also beyond COVID-19 when other unique public health crises may present themselves.

Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Treatment Reduces Hospitalization for Mild and Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Real-World Experience.

BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibody (NmAb) treatments have received Emergency Use Authorization to treat patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 infection. To date, no real- world data on the efficacy of NmAbs have been reported from clinical practice. We assessed the impact of NmAb treatment given in the outpatient clinical practice setting on hospital utilization. METHODS: Electronic medical records were used to identify adult COVID-19 patients who received NmAbs (bamlanivimab [BAM] or casirivimab and imdevimab [REGN-COV2]) and historic COVID-19 controls. Post-index hospitalization rates were compared. RESULTS: 707 confirmed COVID-19 patients received NmAbs and 1709 historic COVID-19 controls were included; 553 (78%) received BAM, 154 (22%) received REGN-COV2. Patients receiving NmAb infusion had significantly lower hospitalization rates (5.8% vs 11.4%, P < .0001), shorter length of stay if hospitalized (mean, 5.2 vs 7.4 days; P = .02), and fewer ED visits within 30 days post-index (8.1% vs 12.3%, P = .003) than controls. Hospitalization-free survival was significantly longer in NmAb patients compared with controls (P < .0001). There was a trend towards a lower hospitalization rate among patients who received NmAbs within 2-4 days after symptom onset. In multivariate analysis, having received an NmAb transfusion was independently associated with a lower risk of hospitalization after adjustment for age, sex, race, BMI, and referral source (adjusted HR [95% CI], .54 [0.38-0.79]; P = .0012). Overall mortality was not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: NmAb treatment reduced hospital utilization, especially when received within a few days of symptom onset. Further study is needed to validate these findings.