Search

Objectives Materials and Methods Results Conclusion To determine the effectiveness of telehealth, among patients reviewed for urological oncological diseases, compared with standard face‐to‐face (F2F) consultations with regard to patient‐reported satisfaction through use of a validated questionnaire.We conducted a single‐centre randomised controlled trial in 126 patients recruited from the Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centres urological oncology clinics. Patients were randomised to either a telehealth audio‐only (telephone) consultation group or a standard F2F consultation group for their next routine appointment. Validated questionnaires, using a 4‐point Likert index scale, were completed at the end of the appointments. Questionnaire scores were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U‐test. The primary outcome measured was patients' preference for type of consultation on subsequent follow‐up. Secondary outcomes involved evaluation of efficiency, quality of care, ease of understanding, overall satisfaction, professionalism, limitations, and convenience.A total of 63 patients in the F2F group and 53 patients in the telephone group completed and returned the validated questionnaires. Patients' preference for next follow‐up was statistically significant, favouring the telephone group (P = 0.012). For the secondary outcomes, patients in the telephone group also reported greater satisfaction with regard to the efficiency and timing of the consultation (P = 0.005). Conversely, patients in the F2F group reported higher rates of satisfaction with regard to ‘tests and follow‐up’ and the clinician's ability to deal with their issues, as compared to the telephone group (P = 0.002). Also, patients in the F2F group reported higher rates of perceived quality of consultation (P = 0.027).Our study demonstrates that patients with urological oncological diseases attending routine follow‐up generally prefer telehealth over F2F appointments. However, patients in the F2F group perceived that there was a higher quality of care in their consultation, and that the services provided were superior, in comparison to patients in the telehealth group. These are barriers to the widespread adoption of telehealth in urological oncology follow‐up care and are rarely reported in the current literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Patients and Methods Results Conclusions To examine the impact of increased compliance to contemporary perioperative care measures, as outlined by enhanced recover after surgery (ERAS) guidelines, among patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC).From the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database we captured patients undergoing RC between 2019 and 2021. We identified five perioperative care measures: regional anaesthesia block, thromboembolism prophylaxis, ≤24 h perioperative antibiotic administration, absence of bowel preparation, and early oral diet. We stratified patients by the number of measures utilised (one to five). Statistical endpoints included 30‐day complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), readmissions, and optimal RC outcome. Optimal RC outcome was defined as absence of any postoperative complication, re‐operation, prolonged LOS (75th percentile, 8 days) with no readmission. Multivariable regressions with Bonferroni correction were performed to assess the association between use of contemporary perioperative care measures and outcomes.Of the 3702 patients who underwent RC, 73 (2%), 417 (11%), 1010 (27%), 1454 (39%), and 748 (20%) received one, two, three, four, and five interventions, respectively. On multivariable analysis, increased perioperative care measures were associated with lower odds of any complication (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 99% confidence interval [CI] 0.6–0.73), and shorter LOS (β −0.82, 99% CI −0.99 to −0.65). Furthermore, patients with increased compliance to contemporary care measures had increased odds of an optimal outcome (OR 1.38, 99% CI 1.26–1.51).Among the measures we assessed, greater adherence yielded improved postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing RC. Our work supports the efficacy of ERAS protocols in reducing the morbidity associated with RC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains incurable in advanced stages. Biomarkers have proven to be quite useful in cancer therapeutics. Herein, we provide a comparative/integrative statistical analysis of seminal immunohistochemistry (IHC) findings for Wilms' Tumor 1 antigen (WT1) and thymine dimers (TDs), emerging as atypical, yet promising, potential biomarkers for RCCs. We assessed WT1/TD reactivity in adult RCC tumor cells, tumor microenvironment (TME), and tumor-adjacent healthy renal tissue (HRT). WT1 positivity was scarce and strictly nuclear in tumor cells, whereas TD-reactive tumor tissues were prevalent. We report statistically significant positive correlations between the density of reactive RCC cellularity and the intensity of nuclear staining for both biomarkers (WT1 − rho = 0.341, p-value = 0.036; TDs − rho = 0.379, p-value = 0.002). RCC stromal TME TD-positivity was much more frequent than WT1 reactivity, apparently proportional to that of the proper RCC cellularity and facilitated by extensive RCC inflammatory infiltration. TDs exhibited nuclear reactivity for most TME cell lines, while RCC TME WT1 expression was rare and inconsistent. In HRTs, TDs were entirely restricted to renal tubular cells, the likely cellular progenitor of most conventional RCC subtypes. In lieu of proper validation, these early findings have significant implications regarding the origins/biology of RCCs and may inform RCC therapeutics, both accounting for the high frequency of immunotherapy-permissive frameshift indels in RCCs, but also hinting at novel predictive clinical tools for WT1-targeted immunotherapy. Overall, the current study represents a meek yet hopefully significant step towards understanding the molecular biology and potential therapeutic targets of RCCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Personalized medicine poses great opportunities and challenges. While the therapeutic landscape markedly expands, descriptions about status, clinical implementation and real-world benefits of precision oncology and molecular tumor boards (MTB) remain sparse, particularly in the field of genitourinary (GU) cancer. Hence, this study characterized urological MTB cases to better understand the potential role of MTB in uro-oncology. Methods: We analyzed patients with complete data sets being reviewed at an MTB from January 2019 to October 2022, focusing on results of molecular analysis and treatment recommendations. Results: We evaluated 102 patients with GU cancer with a mean patient age of 61.7 years. Prostate cancer (PCa) was the most frequent entity with 52.9% (54/102), followed by bladder cancer (18.6%, 19/102) and renal cell carcinoma (14.7%, 15/102). On average, case presentation at MTB took place 54.9 months after initial diagnosis and after 2.7 previous lines of therapy. During the study period, 49.0% (50/102) of patients deceased. Additional MTB-based treatment recommendations were achieved in a majority of 68.6% (70/102) of patients, with a recommendation for targeted therapy in 64.3% (45/70) of these patients. Only 6.7% (3/45) of patients – due to different reasons – received the recommended MTB-based therapy though, with 33% (1/3) of patients reaching disease control. Throughout the MTB study period, GU cancer case presentations and treatment recommendations increased, while the time interval between initial presentation and final therapy recommendation were decreasing over time. Conclusion: Presentation of uro-oncological patients at the MTB is a highly valuable measure for clinical decision-making. Prospectively, earlier presentation of patients at the MTB and changing legislative issues regarding comprehensive molecular testing and targeted treatment approval might further improve patients' benefits from comprehensive molecular diagnostics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]