Search

Objective: To examine the utilization of adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) in contemporary prostate cancer patients with adverse pathological features at radical prostatectomy (RP)., Methods: We identified 189,240 patients with adverse features at RP (positive margin, stage ≥pT3a, and/or pN1 disease), from 2004 to 2015, within the National Cancer Database, and validated our findings within Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. We examined the utilization of patients with aRT with adverse features at RP and patients with very aggressive disease (at least 2 of the following: ≥pT3b, pathological Gleason 8-10, and pN1). Regression analysis examined the relationship of various predictors of utilization adjusting to confounders. Pseudo R 2 analysis examined the magnitude of influence that each variable had on the decision to use aRT., Results: Within the National Cancer Database cohort, only 11.7% of our patients received aRT. In patients with very aggressive disease, aRT utilization rate was 28.9%. Within the SEER cohort, 16.3% of patients with any adverse features at time of RP received aRT. In patients with very aggressive disease, only 30% of patients received aRT. Further, year of diagnosis, Gleason grade, pathologic stage, and positive surgical margin were the variables that had the greatest influence on the decision to use aRT, and that positive surgical margin, type of institution at which care was received, and lymph node involvement were the most influential variables in patients with very aggressive disease., Conclusions: The current standard of care in the United States represents a significant underutilization of aRT in eligible patients with prostate cancer. Urgent efforts are necessary to address this quality-of-care concern., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend a pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) if a nomogram predicted risk of lymph node invasion (LNI) is ≥2%. We examined this and other thresholds, including nomogram validation., Methods: We examined records of 26,713 patients treated with RP and PLND between 2010 and 2013, within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Nomogram thresholds of 2-5% were tested and external validation was performed., Results: LNI was recorded in 4.7% of patients. Nomogram accuracy was 80.4% and maintained minimum accuracy of 75.6% in subgroup analyses, according to age, race, and nodal yield >10. With the NCCN recommended 2% nomogram threshold, PLND could be avoided in 22.3% of patients at the expense of missing 3.0% of individuals with LNI. Alternative thresholds of 3%, 4%, and 5% yielded respective PLND avoidance rates of 60.4%, 71.0%, and 79.8% at the expense of missing 17.8%, 27.2%, and 36.6% of patients with LNI. NCCN cut-off recommendation was best satisfied with a threshold of <2.6%, at which PLND could be avoided in 13,234 patients (49.5%) versus missing 141 patients with LNI (11.2%)., Conclusion: NCCN LNI nomogram remains accurate in contemporary patients. However, the 2% threshold appears to be too strict, since only 22.3% of PLNDs can be avoided, instead of the stipulated 47.7%. The optimal 2.6% threshold allows a higher rate of PLND avoidance (49.5%), at the cost of 11.2% missed instances of LNI, as recommended by NCCN guidelines. PATIENT SUMMARY. External validation in contemporary SEER prostate cancer patients showed that the NCCN nomogram remains accurate for predicting lymph node invasion and seems to be optimal at an alternative 2.6% threshold, with best ratio of avoided pelvic lymph node dissections (49.5%) and missed LNIs (11.2%), as recommended by NCCN guideline. Prostate 77:542-548, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: To externally validate the updated 2012 Partin Tables in contemporary North American patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized prostate cancer (PCa) at community institutions., Materials and Methods: We examined records of 25,254 patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) between 2010 and 2013, within the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. The ROC derived AUC assessed discriminant properties of the updated 2012 Partin Tables of organ confined disease (OC), extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesical invasion (SVI), and lymph node invasion (LNI). Calibration plots focused on calibration between predicted and observed rates., Results: Proportions of OC, ECE, SVI, and LNI at RP were 69.8%, 18.4%, 7.4%, and 4.4%, respectively. Accuracy for prediction of OC, ECE, SVI, and LNI was 70.4%, 59.9%, 72.9%, and 77.1%, respectively. In subgroup analyses in patients with nodal yield >10, accuracy for LNI prediction was 76.0%. Subgroup analyses in elderly patients and in African American patients revealed decreased accuracy for prediction of all four endpoints. Last but not least, SVI and LNI calibration plots showed excellent agreement, versus good agreement for OC (maximum underestimation of 10%) and poor agreement for ECE (maximum overestimation of 12%)., Conclusion: Taken together, the updated 2012 Partin Tables can be unequivocally endorsed for prediction of OC, SVI, and LNI in community-based patients with localized PCa. Conversely, ECE predictions failed to reach the minimum accuracy requirements of 70%. Prostate 77:105-113, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: The "July effect" refers to the phenomenon of adverse impacts on patient care arising from the changeover in medical staff that takes place during this month at academic medical centres in North America. There has been some evidence supporting the presence of the July effect, including data from surgical specialties. Uniformity of care, regardless of time of year, is required for patients undergoing major cancer surgery. We therefore sought to perform a population-level assessment for the presence of a July effect in this field., Methods: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to abstract data on patients undergoing 1 of 8 major cancer surgeries at academic medical centres between Jan. 1, 1999, and Dec. 30, 2009. The primary outcomes examined were postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality. Univariate analyses and subsequently multivariate analyses, controlling for patient and hospital characteristics, were performed to identify whether the time of surgery was an independent predictor of outcome after major cancer surgery., Results: On univariate analysis, the overall postoperative complication rate, as well as genitourinary and hematologic complications specifically, was higher in July than the rest of the year. However, on multivariate analysis, only hematologic complications were significantly higher in July, with no difference in overall postoperative complication rate or in-hospital mortality for all 8 surgeries considered separately or together., Conclusion: On the whole, the data confirm an absence of a July effect in patients undergoing major cancer surgery.