Donor-derived duodenal adenocarcinoma of a bladder-drained pancreas allograft.

The subset of the population that received bladder-drained allograft pancreata during peak utilization of the technique in the 1990s is approaching 20-30 postoperative years. This time frame is salient, as it parallels the time in which patients in the urologic literature develop adenocarcinomas after bladder reconstruction using gastrointestinal segments. We present the case of a 57-year-old simultaneous pancreas/kidney recipient who presented with microhematuria twenty-four years after transplantation and was found to have an adenocarcinoma of the duodenum of his failed, bladder-drained pancreas. After allograft pancreatectomy/duodenectomy, he remains disease-free eleven months postoperatively. As this patient population ages, practitioners should consider pathology of the donor duodenum and pancreas in recipients who present with gross or microscopic hematuria.

Development and Validation of Models to Predict Pathological Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy in Regional and National Cohorts.

PURPOSE: Prediction models are recommended by national guidelines to support clinical decision making in prostate cancer. Existing models to predict pathological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP)-the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) models, Partin tables, and the Briganti nomogram-have been developed using data from tertiary care centers and may not generalize well to other settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from a regional cohort (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative [MUSIC]) were used to develop models to predict extraprostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), lymph node invasion (LNI), and nonorgan-confined disease (NOCD) in patients undergoing RP. The MUSIC models were compared against the MSK models, Partin tables, and Briganti nomogram (for LNI) using data from a national cohort (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] registry). RESULTS: We identified 7,491 eligible patients in the SEER registry. The MUSIC model had good discrimination (SEER AUC EPE: 0.77; SVI: 0.80; LNI: 0.83; NOCD: 0.77) and was well calibrated. While the MSK models had similar discrimination to the MUSIC models (SEER AUC EPE: 0.76; SVI: 0.80; LNI: 0.84; NOCD: 0.76), they overestimated the risk of EPE, LNI, and NOCD. The Partin tables had inferior discrimination (SEER AUC EPE: 0.67; SVI: 0.76; LNI: 0.69; NOCD: 0.72) as compared to other models. The Briganti LNI nomogram had an AUC of 0.81 in SEER but overestimated the risk. CONCLUSIONS: New models developed using the MUSIC registry outperformed existing models and should be considered as potential replacements for the prediction of pathological outcomes in prostate cancer.

Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline. Part III: Principles of Radiation and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part III of the three-part series dedicated to Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, discussing principles of radiation and offering several future directions of further relevant study in patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer. Please refer to Parts I and II for discussion of risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management (Part I), and principles of active surveillance and surgery and follow-up (Part II). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Statements regarding management of patients using radiation therapy as well as important future directions of research are detailed herein. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline aims to inform clinicians treating patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to further improve care for these men.

Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, Part I: Introduction, Risk Assessment, Staging, and Risk-Based Management.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part I of the three-part series dedicated to Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, discussing risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management in patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer. Please refer to Parts II and III for discussion of principles of active surveillance, surgery and follow-up (Part II), and principles of radiation and future directions (Part III). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Statements regarding risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management are detailed herein. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline aims to inform clinicians treating patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to further improve care for these men.

Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, Part II: Principles of Active Surveillance, Principles of Surgery, and Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part II of the three-part series dedicated to Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, discussing principles of active surveillance and surgery as well as follow-up for patients after primary treatment. Please refer to Parts I and III for discussion of risk assessment, staging, and risk-based management (Part I), and principles of radiation and future directions (Part III). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. A research librarian conducted searches in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The methodology team supplemented searches of electronic databases with the studies included in the prior AUA review and by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS: The Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Panel created evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to aid clinicians in the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Statements regarding active surveillance, surgical management, and patient follow-up are detailed. CONCLUSION: This guideline aims to inform clinicians treating patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Continued research and publication of high-quality evidence from future trials will be essential to further improve care for these men.

The adverse association between stimulant use for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and semen parameters.

This study examined the relationship between stimulant medications used for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and semen parameters. We performed a retrospective cohort study at a large, academic institution between 2002 and 2020. We included men with a semen analysis without prior spermatotoxic medication use, empiric medical therapy exposure or confounding medical diagnoses (varicocele, Klinefelter's syndrome, cryptorchidism, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, cancer or cancer-related treatment, and azoospermia). Men were stratified by stimulant exposure (methylphenidate or amphetamines). A multivariable linear regression was fit to assess the association between individual semen parameters, age, stimulant exposure and non-stimulant medication use. Of 8,861 men identified, 106 men had active prescriptions for stimulants within 90 days prior to semen testing. After controlling for age and exposure to non-stimulant medications, stimulant use was associated with decreased total motile sperm count (ß: -18.00 mil/ejaculate and standard error: 8.44, p = 0.033) in the setting of decreased semen volume (ß: -0.35 ml, and standard error: 0.16, p = 0.035), but not sperm concentration, motility and morphology. These findings suggest a role for reproductive physicians and mental health providers to consider counselling men on the potential negative impact of stimulants prescribed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder on semen volume during fertility planning.

Surgeon Scorecards Improve Muscle Sampling on Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor and Recurrence Outcomes in Patients with Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.

PURPOSE: The presence of detrusor muscle is essential for accurate staging of T1 cancers. Detrusor muscle presence can be a quality indicator of transurethral resection of bladder tumor for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. We hypothesized that increasing surgeon awareness of personal and institutional detrusor muscle sampling rates could improve resection quality and long-term oncologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of transurethral resections of bladder tumor from 1/2006 to 2/2018 was performed. The presence of detrusor muscle in the pathology report and transurethral resection specimen were extracted from records. Individual surgeon scorecards were created and distributed. Rates of detrusor muscle sampling were compared prior to and 12 months after distribution. Chart review was done to compare 3-year recurrence and progression outcomes before and after distribution of scorecards. RESULTS: The rate of detrusor muscle sampling increased from 36% (1,250/3,488) to 54% (202/373) (p=0.001) in the 12 months after scorecard distribution, ie from 30% (448/1,500) to 55% (91/165) (p <0.001) in Ta tumors and from 47% (183/390) to 72% (42/58) (p <0.001) in T1 tumors. Pathological reporting of muscle also improved for all samples (73%, 2,530/3,488 to 90%, 334/373, p <0.001), Ta (75%, 1,127/1,500 to 94%, 155/165, p <0.001) and T1 (93%, 362/390 to 100%, 58/58, p=0.04). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, the surgeon scorecard was associated with decreased 3-year risk of recurrence (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Creation and distribution of individual surgeon scorecards improved detrusor muscle sampling on transurethral resection and was associated with decreased risk of disease recurrence. Quality evaluation of transurethral resection of bladder tumor may contribute to improved outcomes of patients with nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer.

Comparison of Cancer Specific Outcomes following Minimally Invasive and Open Surgical Resection of Early Stage Kidney Cancer from a National Cancer Registry.

PURPOSE: With anecdotal observations of atypical recurrences following minimally invasive surgery and alongside new concerns following cervical cancer surgery, there is a need to evaluate cancer specific outcomes for minimally invasive kidney cancer surgery using national data. We evaluated cancer specific outcomes following minimally invasive surgery vs open surgery for early stage kidney cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective population based cohort study using data from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) program linked with Medicare claims that included beneficiaries at least 66 years old diagnosed between 2004 and 2013 with early stage, nonurothelial kidney cancer who underwent surgical resection within a year of diagnosis. We compared overall survival, disease specific survival, rate of second kidney cancer surgery and rate of postoperative systemic cancer therapy based on whether surgery was minimally invasive surgery or an open resection. Multivariable regression was used to account for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 5,150 patients were included in analysis and 3,062 (59.5%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. On multivariable analysis minimally invasive surgery was not associated with differences in overall survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-1.06) or disease specific survival (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83-1.11). Patients treated with minimally invasive surgery were more likely to receive systemic cancer therapy (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.09-1.59). No difference in the rate of second surgery associated with surgical approach was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Use of minimally invasive surgery for early stage kidney cancer was not associated with differences in overall or disease specific survival, or the rate of second kidney cancer surgery. Patients treated with minimally invasive surgery received more postoperative systemic therapy, which could represent a disparate cancer specific outcome associated with minimally invasive surgery.

Surgical versus Medical Castration for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Use and Overall Survival in a National Cohort.

PURPOSE: Surgical castration for metastatic prostate cancer is used less frequently than medical castration yet costs less, requires less followup and may be associated with fewer adverse effects. We evaluated temporal trends and factors associated with the use of surgical castration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study sampled 24,805 men with newly diagnosed (de novo) metastatic prostate cancer from a national cancer registry in the United States (2004 to 2016). Multivariable logistic regression assessed the association between sociodemographic factors and surgery. Multivariable Cox regression evaluated the association between castration type and overall survival. RESULTS: Overall 5.4% of men underwent surgical castration. This figure decreased from 8.5% in 2004 to 3.5% in 2016 (per year later OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.87-0.91, p <0.001). Compared to Medicare, private insurance was associated with less surgery (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.87, p <0.001) while Medicaid or no insurance was associated with more surgery (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.34-2.11, p <0.001 and OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.58-2.85, p <0.001, respectively). Regional median income greater than $63,000 was associated with less surgery (vs income less than $38,000 OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.85, p=0.004). After a median followup of 30 months castration type was not associated with differences in survival (surgical vs medical HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95-1.09, p=0.6). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary, real-world cohort surgical castration use is low and decreasing despite its potential advantages and similar survival rate compared to medical castration. Men with potentially limited health care access undergo more surgery, perhaps reflecting a provider bias toward the perceived benefit of permanent castration.

Association between surgical approach and survival following resection of abdominopelvic malignancies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recent studies demonstrating decreased survival following minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for cervical cancer have generated concern regarding oncologic efficacy of MIS. Our objective was to evaluate the association between surgical approach and 5-year survival following resection of abdominopelvic malignancies. METHODS: Patients with stage I or II adenocarcinoma of the prostate, colon, rectum, and stage IA2 or IB1 cervical cancer from 2010-2015 were identified from the National Cancer Data Base. The association between surgical approach and 5-year survival was assessed using propensity-score-matched cohorts. Distributions were compared using logistic regression. Hazard ratio for death was estimated using Cox proportional-hazard models. RESULTS: The rate of deaths at 5 years was 3.4% following radical prostatectomy, 22.9% following colectomy, 18.6% following proctectomy, and 6.8% following radical hysterectomy. Open surgery was associated with worse survival following radical prostatectomy (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.33; P = .005), colectomy (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.39-1.51; P < .001), and proctectomy (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10-1.50; P = .002); however, open surgery was associated with improved survival following radical hysterectomy (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.82; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that MIS is an acceptable approach in selected patients with prostate, colon, and rectal cancers, while concerns regarding MIS resection of cervical cancer appear warranted.

Grade Groups Provide Improved Predictions of Pathological and Early Oncologic Outcomes Compared with Gleason Score Risk Groups.

PURPOSE: The GG (Grade Group) system was introduced in 2013. Data from academic centers suggest that GG better distinguishes between prostate cancer risk groups than the Gleason score (GS) risk groups. We compared the performance of the 2 systems to predict pathological/recurrence outcomes using data from the MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent biopsy and radical prostatectomy in the MUSIC from March 2012 to June 2017 were classified according to GG and GS. Outcomes included the presence or absence of extraprostatic extension, seminal vesical invasion, positive lymph nodes, positive surgical margins and time to cancer recurrence (defined as postoperative prostate specific antigen 0.2 ng/ml or greater). Logistic and Cox regression models were used to compare the difference in outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 8,052 patients were identified. When controlling for patient characteristics, significantly higher risks of extraprostatic extension, seminal vesical invasion and positive lymph nodes were observed for biopsy GG 3 vs 2 and for GG 5 vs 4 (p <0.001). Biopsy GGs 3, 4 and 5 also showed shorter time to biochemical recurrence than GGs 2, 3 and 4, respectively (p <0.001). GGs 3, 4 and 5 at radical prostatectomy were each associated with a greater probability of recurrence compared to the next lower GG (p <0.001). GG (vs GS) had better predictive power for extraprostatic extension, seminal vesical invasion, positive lymph nodes and biochemical recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: GG at biopsy and radical prostatectomy allows for better discrimination of recurrence-free survival between individual risk groups than GS risk groups with GGs 2, 3, 4 and 5 each incrementally associated with increased risk.

Optimizing active surveillance strategies to balance the competing goals of early detection of grade progression and minimizing harm from biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer includes follow-up with serial prostate biopsies. The optimal biopsy frequency during follow-up has not been determined. The goal of this investigation was to use longitudinal AS biopsy data to assess whether the frequency of biopsy could be reduced without substantially prolonging the time to the detection of disease with a Gleason score ≥ 7. METHODS: With data from 1375 men with low-risk prostate cancer enrolled in AS at Johns Hopkins, a hidden Markov model was developed to estimate the probability of undersampling at diagnosis, the annual probability of grade progression, and the 10-year cumulative probability of reclassification or progression to Gleason score ≥ 7. It simulated 1024 potential AS biopsy strategies for the 10 years after diagnosis. For each of these strategies, the model predicted the mean delay in the detection of disease with a Gleason score ≥ 7. RESULTS: The model estimated the 10-year cumulative probability of reclassification from a Gleason score of 6 to a Gleason score ≥ 7 to be 40.0%. The probability of undersampling at diagnosis was 9.8%, and the annual progression probability for men with a Gleason score of 6 was 4.0%. On the basis of these estimates, a simulation of an annual biopsy strategy estimated the mean time to the detection of disease with a Gleason score ≥ 7 to be 14.1 months; however, several strategies eliminated biopsies with only small delays (<12 months) in detecting grade progression. CONCLUSIONS: Although annual biopsy for low-risk men on AS is associated with the shortest time to the detection of disease with a Gleason score ≥ 7, several alternative strategies may allow less frequent biopsying without sizable delays in detecting grade progression. Cancer 2018;124:698-705. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Evaluation of a needle disinfectant technique to reduce infection-related hospitalisation after transrectal prostate biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a needle disinfectant step during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is associated with lower rates of infection-related hospitalisation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all TRUS-guided prostate biopsies taken across the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) from January 2012 to March 2015. Natural variation in technique allowed us to evaluate for differences in infection-related hospitalisations based on whether or not a needle disinfectant technique was used. The disinfectant technique was an intra-procedural step to cleanse the biopsy needle with antibacterial solution after each core was sampled (i.e., 10% formalin or 70% isopropyl alcohol). After grouping biopsies according to whether or not the procedure included a needle disinfectant step, we compared the rate of infection-related hospitalisations within 30 days of biopsy. Generalised estimating equation models were fit to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: During the evaluated period, 17 954 TRUS-guided prostate biopsies were taken with 5 321 (29.6%) including a disinfectant step. The observed rate of infection-related hospitalisation was lower when a disinfectant technique was used during biopsy (0.60% vs 0.90%; P = 0.04). After accounting for differences between groups the adjusted hospitalisation rate in the disinfectant group was 0.85% vs 1.12% in the no disinfectant group (adjusted odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.50-1.15; P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational analysis, hospitalisations for infectious complications were less common when the TRUS-guided prostate biopsy included a needle disinfection step. However, after adjusting for potential confounders the effect of needle disinfection was not statistically significant. Prospective evaluation is warranted to determine if this step provides a scalable and effective method to minimise infectious complications.

Leveraging the clinical collaborative model to drive value improvement.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Physician-led quality improvement collaboratives have emerged across surgical disciplines as a means to measure and subsequently improve the quality and cost of care. In this review, we will provide an overview of recent successes within quality improvement collaboratives, as well as discuss future opportunities for such initiatives. RECENT FINDINGS: Successful quality improvement collaboratives have coupled data registries with a collegial environment to achieve data-driven improvements in care across diverse practice settings. Such efforts have a track record for accomplishing specific patient safety gains, and have more recently addressed complex care scenarios where data and consensus building have been leveraged to clarify optimal care pathways. Collaboratives are currently exploring mechanisms to meaningfully impact increasingly complex elements of care delivery, such as individual surgeon performance. SUMMARY: Quality improvement collaboratives are in a unique position to understand patterns in care across populations, lead evidence-based assessments of variation in quality, and to attempt to intervene to improve outcomes based on the data they accumulate. As healthcare increasingly shifts to emphasize quality of care, physician-led collaboratives represent an important mechanism to drive improvement.

Variation in Guideline Concordant Active Surveillance Followup in Diverse Urology Practices.

PURPOSE: We examined the frequency of followup prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsy among men treated with active surveillance in the academic and community urology practices comprising MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative). MATERIALS AND METHODS: MUSIC is a consortium of 42 practices that maintains a prospective clinical registry with validated clinical data on all patients diagnosed with prostate cancer at participating sites. We identified all patients in MUSIC practices who entered active surveillance and had at least 2 years of continuous followup. After determining the frequency of repeat prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsy, we calculated rates of concordance with NCCN Guidelines® recommendations (ie at least 3 prostate specific antigen tests and 1 surveillance biopsy) collaborative-wide and across individual practices. RESULTS: We identified 513 patients who entered active surveillance from January 2012 through September 2013 and had at least 2 years of followup. Among the 431 men (84%) who remained on active surveillance for 2 years 132 (30.6%) underwent followup surveillance testing at a frequency that was concordant with NCCN® (National Comprehensive Cancer Network®) recommendations. At the practice level, the median rate of guideline concordant followup was 26.5% (range 10% to 67.5%, p <0.001). Among patients with discordant followup, the absence of followup biopsy was common and not significantly different across practices (median rate 82.0%, p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Among diverse community and academic practices in Michigan, there is wide variation in the proportion of men on active surveillance who meet guideline recommendations for followup prostate specific antigen testing and repeat biopsy. These data highlight the need for standardized active surveillance pathways that emphasize the role of repeat surveillance biopsies.

Appropriateness Criteria for Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The adoption of active surveillance varies widely across urological communities, which suggests a need for more consistency in the counseling of patients. To address this need we used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop appropriateness criteria and counseling statements for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Panelists were recruited from MUSIC urology practices. Combinations of parameters thought to influence decision making were used to create and score 160 theoretical clinical scenarios for appropriateness of active surveillance. Recent rates of active surveillance among real patients across the state were assessed using the MUSIC registry. RESULTS: Low volume Gleason 6 was deemed highly appropriate for active surveillance whereas high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4 were deemed appropriate to uncertain. No scenario was deemed inappropriate or highly inappropriate. Prostate specific antigen density, race and life expectancy impacted scores for intermediate and high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4. The greatest degree of score dispersion (disagreement) occurred in scenarios with long life expectancy, high volume Gleason 6 and low volume Gleason 3+4. Recent rates of active surveillance use among real patients ranged from 0% to 100% at the provider level for low or intermediate biopsy volume Gleason 6, demonstrating a clear opportunity for quality improvement. CONCLUSIONS: By virtue of this work urologists have the opportunity to present specific recommendations from the panel to their individual patients. Community-wide efforts aimed at increasing rates of active surveillance and reducing practice and physician level variation in the choice of active surveillance vs treatment are warranted.

Comparison of Pathological Outcomes for Men with Low Risk Prostate Cancer from Diverse Practice Settings: Similar Results from Immediate Prostatectomy or Initial Surveillance with Delayed Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: We compared pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy for a population based sample of men with low risk prostate cancer initially on active surveillance and undergoing delayed prostatectomy vs those treated with immediate surgery in order to better understand this expectant management approach outside of the context of academic cohorts. We hypothesized that delays in surgery due to initial surveillance would not impact surgical pathological outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 2 groups of patients with NCCN low risk prostate cancer from practices in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative, that is 1) men who chose initial active surveillance and went on to delayed prostatectomy and 2) men who chose immediate prostatectomy. Diagnoses occurred from January 2011 through August 2015. For these 2 groups we compared radical prostatectomy Gleason scores, and rates of extraprostatic disease, positive surgical margins, seminal vesicle invasion and lymph node metastases. RESULTS: During a median followup of 506 days 79 (6%) of 1,359 low risk men choosing initial surveillance transitioned to prostatectomy. Compared to those treated with immediate prostatectomy (778), men undergoing delayed surgery were more likely to have Gleason score 7 or greater disease (69.2% vs 48.8%, respectively, p=0.004), but were no more likely to have positive margins, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion or lymph node metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low risk prostate cancer who enter active surveillance have higher grade disease at prostatectomy compared to those undergoing immediate surgery. However, the lack of difference in other adverse pathological outcomes suggests preservation of the window of curability.

An observational analysis of provider adherence to AUA guidelines on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: We retrospectively evaluated urologist adherence to the AUA guidelines on the management of new patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia related lower urinary tract symptoms in a large university urology group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All first time benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptom visits to the urology clinic at the Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 were evaluated using an institutionally managed electronic medical record data repository. Clinical documentation and orders from each encounter were assessed to determine the rate of performance of guideline measures. Approximately 1% of all results were manually reviewed in a validation process designed to determine the reliability of the electronic medical record based system. RESULTS: A total of 3,494 eligible encounters were evaluated in the final analysis. Provider adherence rates with the 9 measures recommended in the guidelines varied by measure from 53.0% to 92.8%. The rate of performance of 5 not routinely recommended measures was 10.2% or less. Post-void residual and urinary flow measurement were optional measures, and were performed on 68.1% and 4.6% of new encounters respectively. Manual validation revealed the electronic medical record data extraction was concordant with manual review in 96.7% of cases (95% CI 94.8-98.5). CONCLUSIONS: Using electronic medical record based data extraction techniques, we reliably document a baseline adherence rate with AUA guidelines on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Establishing this benchmark will be important for future investigation into patient outcomes related to guideline adherence and into methods for improving provider adherence.

Application of the 2013 American Urological Association early detection of prostate cancer guideline: who will we miss?

PURPOSE: The American Urological Association (AUA) published new prostate cancer (CaP) screening guidelines in 2013. We apply the guidelines to a retrospective cohort to compare tumor characteristics of those no longer recommended for screening with those who remain screening candidates. METHODS: We identified cases of screening detected CaP (stage cT1c) in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database from October 2005 to December 2010. The 2013 AUA Guidelines were retrospectively applied to the cohort. Men were categorized into three groups for comparison based on whether or not they would now be recommended for CaP screening (Unscreened, Young Unscreened, and Screened). We compared clinical and pathological characteristics of CaP across study groups. RESULTS: A total of 142,382 men were identified. Screening would no longer be recommended for 40,160. Those no longer recommended for screening had higher median PSA (6.4 vs. 5.8 ng/mL, p < 0.01), more Gleason 7 and ≥8 CaP on prostate biopsy (36.4 vs. 34.8 %, p < 0.001; 12.4 vs. 9.2 %, p < 0.001, respectively) and slightly more Gleason ≥8 CaP (9.0 vs. 7.5 %, p = 0.03), and T3 tumors (17.3 vs. 16.5 %, p = 0.01) at prostatectomy. Nodal and distant metastasis rates were clinically equivalent among men screened and unscreened. Subgroup analysis of young patients (40-54 years old) no longer recommended for screening identified intermediate or high-risk Gleason scores at prostatectomy 57.6 % of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Features of CaP in men no longer recommended for routine screening are largely equivalent to if not worse than those in screened men.