Search

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical manage

BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has an established role for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (sPCa). The PRIMARY trial demonstrated that [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) was associated with a significant improvement in sensitivity and negative predictive value for sPCa detection. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that addition of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) radioligand PET/CT will enable some men to avoid transperineal prostate biopsy without missing sPCa, and will facilitate biopsy targeting of PSMA-avid sites. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicentre, two-arm, phase 3, randomised controlled trial will recruit 660 participants scheduled to undergo biopsy. Eligible participants will have clinical suspicion of sPCa with a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 2 and red flags, or a PI-RADS score of 3 on mpMRI (PI-RADS v2). Participants will be randomised at a 1:1 ratio in permuted blocks stratified by centre. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT05154162. INTERVENTION: In the experimental arm, participants will undergo pelvic PSMA PET/CT. Local and central reviewers will interpret scans independently using the PRIMARY score. Participants with a positive result will undergo targeted transperineal prostate biopsies, whereas those with a negative result will undergo prostate-specific antigen monitoring alone. In the control arm, all participants undergo template transperineal prostate biopsies. Participants will be followed for subsequent clinical care for up to 2 yr after randomisation. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: sPCa is defined as Gleason score 3 + 4 (≥10%) = 7 disease (grade group 2) or higher on transperineal prostate biopsy. Avoidance of transperineal prostate biopsy will be measured at 6 mo from randomisation. The primary endpoints will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. CONCLUSIONS: Pat

BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions for men diagnosed with prostate cancer depend on a range of clinical and patient characteristics such as disease stage, age, general health, risk of side effects and access. Associations between treatment patterns and area-level factors such as remoteness and socioeconomic disadvantage have been observed in many countries. OBJECTIVE: To model spatial differences in interventional treatment rates for prostate cancer at high spatial resolution to inform policy and decision-making. METHODS: Hospital separations data for interventional treatments for prostate cancer (radical prostatectomy, low dose rate and high dose rate brachytherapy) for men aged 40 years and over were modelled using spatial models, generalised linear mixed models, maximised excess events tests and k-means statistical clustering. RESULTS: Geographic differences in population rates of interventional treatments were found (p<0.001). Separation rates for radical prostatectomy were lower in remote areas (12.2 per 10 000 person-years compared with 15.0-15.9 in regional and major city areas). Rates for all treatments decreased with increasing socioeconomic disadvantage (radical prostatectomy 19.1 /10 000 person-years in the most advantaged areas compared with 12.9 in the most disadvantaged areas). Three groups of similar areas were identified: those with higher rates of radical prostatectomy, those with higher rates of low dose brachytherapy, and those with low interventional treatment rates but higher rates of excess deaths. The most disadvantaged areas and remote areas tended to be in the latter group. CONCLUSIONS: The geographic differences in treatment rates may partly reflect differences in patients' physical and financial access to treatments. Treatment rates also depend on diagnosis rates and thus reflect variation in investigation rates for prostate cancer and presentation of disease. Spatial variation in interventional treatments may aid identification of areas of u

Background: Lynch syndrome is a rare familial cancer syndrome caused by pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2, that cause predisposition to various cancers, predominantly colorectal and endometrial cancer. Data are emerging that pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes increase the risk of early-onset aggressive prostate cancer. The IMPACT study is prospectively assessing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in men with germline mismatch repair pathogenic variants. Here, we report the usefulness of PSA screening, prostate cancer incidence, and tumour characteristics after the first screening round in men with and without these germline pathogenic variants. Method(s): The IMPACT study is an international, prospective study. Men aged 40-69 years without a previous prostate cancer diagnosis and with a known germline pathogenic variant in the MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 gene, and age-matched male controls who tested negative for a familial pathogenic variant in these genes were recruited from 34 genetic and urology clinics in eight countries, and underwent a baseline PSA screening. Men who had a PSA level higher than 3.0 ng/mL were offered a transrectal, ultrasound-guided, prostate biopsy and a histopathological analysis was done. All participants are undergoing a minimum of 5 years' annual screening. The primary endpoint was to determine the incidence, stage, and pathology of screening-detected prostate cancer in carriers of pathogenic variants compared with non-carrier controls. We used Fisher's exact test to compare the number of cases, cancer incidence, and positive predictive values of the PSA cutoff and biopsy between carriers and non-carriers and the differences between disease types (ie, cancer vs no cancer, clinically significant cancer vs no cancer). We assessed screening outcomes and tumour characteristics by pathogenic variant status. Here we present results from the first round of PSA screening in the IMPACT study. This

PURPOSE: We previously reported that enzalutamide improved overall survival when added to standard of care in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Here, we report its effects on aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHOD(S): HRQL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality-of-life questionnaire and QLM-PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then every 12 weeks until progression. Scores from week 4 to 156 were analyzed with repeated measures modeling to calculate group means and differences. Deterioration-free survival was from random assignment until the earliest of death, clinical progression, discontinuation of study treatment, or a worsening of 10 points or more from baseline in fatigue, physical function, cognitive function, or overall health and quality of life (OHQL). HRQL scores range from 0 (lowest possible) to 100 (highest possible). RESULT(S): HRQL was assessed in 1,042 of 1,125 participants (93%). Differences in means favored control over enzalutamide for fatigue (5.2, 95% CI, 3.6 to 6.9; P < .001), cognitive function (4.0, 95% CI, 2.5 to 5.5; P < .001), and physical function (2.6, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.9; P < .001), but not OHQL (1.2, 95% CI, -0.2 to 2.7; P = .1). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years, and log-rank P values comparing the whole distributions, favored enzalutamide over control for OHQL (31% v 17%; P < .0001), cognitive function (31% v 20%; P = .001), and physical function (31% v 22%; P < .001), but not fatigue (24% v 18%; P = .16). The effects of enzalutamide on HRQL were independent of baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION(S): Enzalutamide was associated with worsening of self-reported fatigue, cognitive function, and physical function, but not OHQL. Enzalutamide was associated with improved deterioration-free survival for OHQL, physical function, and cognitive function because delays in disease progression outweighed early deteriorations in these aspects of HRQL.

Background: The first planned interim analysis of ENZAMET, with 243 deaths after a median follow-up of 34 months, revealed a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit in mHSPC with the addition of enzalutamide to standard of care (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86, p=0.002, Davis et al, NEJM 2019). We now present updated overall survival (OS) findings from the prespecified analysis triggered to occur after 470 deaths. Method(s): We randomly assigned participants (pts) with mHSPC to treatment with testosterone suppression (TS) plus either a conventional non-steroidal anti-androgen (NSAA) or enzalutamide. Stratification factors included age, volume of disease (high vs low according to the CHAARTED definition), and planned use of concurrent docetaxel assigned by the treating physician (docetaxel yes vs no). Result(s): We randomized 1125 pts with a median age of 69 years, including 503 in the docetaxel stratum, and 602 with high volume metastatic disease. OS results in the table below are based on 476 deaths, a median follow-up of 68 months, and a cut-off date of 19JAN2022. The hazard rate for death was 30% lower among all those assigned enzalutamide versus control (p<0.0001). Outcomes by volume status are shown (Table) as well as the subgroups of interest with M1 high or low volume disease at diagnosis selected for concurrent docetaxel. Conclusion(s): Enzalutamide added to TS, compared with an active comparator of NSAA, provided clinically meaningful improvements in OS for the combined overall cohort, which persisted with an additional 3 years of followup. The benefits were more pronounced in pts with low volume disease, and were also seen in the subgroup with M1 high volume mHSPC despite the relatively high survival with TS+docetaxel+NSAA. ENZAMET was led by ANZUP Cancer Trials Group and the University of Sydney NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, with funding support from Astellas.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of a multicomponent survivorship programme for men with prostate cancer and their carers. DESIGN: A single cohort study, guided by the RE-AIM framework. SETTING: Multiple health services in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Men with prostate cancer and their carers, and health professionals. INTERVENTION: A 12-month telehealth programme that provided centralised and coordinated decision and information support, exercise and nutrition management, specialised clinical support and practical support to men and their carers. DATA COLLECTION: Multiple sources of data including participant-reported health outcomes and experience of care, qualitative interviews, records of the programme were collected at different time points. RESULTS: Reach: Of 394 eligible men at various stages of survivorship, 142 consented (36% consent rate) and 136 (96%) completed the programme. Adoption: All men participated in general care coordination and more than half participated in exercise and/or nutrition management interventions. Participation in the specialised support component (ie, psychosocial and sexual health support, continence management) was low despite the high level of need reported by men. Effectiveness: Overall, the men reported improvements in their experience of care. Implementation: Factors such as addressing service gaps, provision of specialised services, care coordination, adoption of needs-based and telehealth-based approaches were identified as enablers to the successful implementation of the programme. Issues such as insufficient integration with existing services, lack of resources and high caseload of the intervention team, men's reluctance to discuss needs and lack of confidence with technology were barriers in implementing the programme. CONCLUSION: Survivorship interventions are relevant to men regardless of the stage of their disease and treatments undertaken. It is possible to provide access to a comprehensive model of survivorship

Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but various areas of management still lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The 2021 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) addressed some of these questions to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results from APCCC 2021. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts identified three major areas of controversy related to management of advanced prostate cancer: newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the use of prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands in diagnostics and therapy, and molecular characterisation of tissue and blood. A panel of 86 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 107 pre-defined questions, which were developed by both voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflected the opinions of panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients to navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised according to patient characteristics, such as the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), comorbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations, and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical eviden

PURPOSE: We previously reported that enzalutamide improved overall survival when added to standard of care in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Here, we report its effects on aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQL). METHODS: HRQL was assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality-of-life questionnaire and QLM-PR25 at weeks 0, 4, 12, and then every 12 weeks until progression. Scores from week 4 to 156 were analyzed with repeated measures modeling to calculate group means and differences. Deterioration-free survival was from random assignment until the earliest of death, clinical progression, discontinuation of study treatment, or a worsening of 10 points or more from baseline in fatigue, physical function, cognitive function, or overall health and quality of life (OHQL). HRQL scores range from 0 (lowest possible) to 100 (highest possible). RESULTS: HRQL was assessed in 1,042 of 1,125 participants (93%). Differences in means favored control over enzalutamide for fatigue (5.2, 95% CI, 3.6 to 6.9; P < .001), cognitive function (4.0, 95% CI, 2.5 to 5.5; P < .001), and physical function (2.6, 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.9; P < .001), but not OHQL (1.2, 95% CI, -0.2 to 2.7; P = .1). Deterioration-free survival rates at 3 years, and log-rank P values comparing the whole distributions, favored enzalutamide over control for OHQL (31% v 17%; P < .0001), cognitive function (31% v 20%; P = .001), and physical function (31% v 22%; P < .001), but not fatigue (24% v 18%; P = .16). The effects of enzalutamide on HRQL were independent of baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Enzalutamide was associated with worsening of self-reported fatigue, cognitive function, and physical function, but not OHQL. Enzalutamide was associated with improved deterioration-free survival for OHQL, physical function, and cognitive function because delays in disease progression outweighed early deteriorations in these aspects of HRQL.

PURPOSE: Propensity score-weighting for confounder control and multiple imputation to counter missing data are both widely used methods in epidemiological research. Combination of the two is not trivial and requires a number of decisions to produce valid inference. In this tutorial, we outline the assumptions underlying each of the methods, present our considerations in combining the two, discuss the methodological and practical implications of our choices and briefly point to alternatives. Throughout we apply the theory to a research project about post-traumatic stress disorder in Syrian refugees. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We detail how we used logistic regression-based propensity scores to produce "standardized mortality ratio"-weights and Substantive Model Compatible-Full Conditional Specification for multiple imputation of missing data to get the estimate of association. Finally, a percentile confidence interval was produced by bootstrapping. RESULTS: A simple propensity score model with weight truncation at 1st and 99th percentile obtained acceptable balance on all covariates and was chosen as our model. Due to computational issues in the multiple imputation, two levels of one of the substantive model covariates and two levels of one of the auxiliary covariates were collapsed. This slightly modified propensity score model was the substantive model in the SMC-FCS multiple imputation, and regression models were set up for all partially observed covariates. We set the number of imputations to 10 and number of iterations to 40. We produced 999 bootstrap estimates to compute the 95-percentile confidence interval. CONCLUSION: Combining propensity score-weighting and multiple imputation is not a trivial task. We present considerations necessary to do so, realizing it is demanding in terms of both workload and computational time; however, we do not consider the former a drawback: it makes some of the underlying assumptions explicit and the latter may be a nuisance that wil

BACKGROUND: Refugees are forced migrants but there is a large variation in the distance that refugees cover and there is a paucity in the evidence of how this may affect refugees' health and health care needs. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the association between long-distance migration and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a serious psychiatric disorder associated with deteriorating mental and somatic health. METHODS: Included from 2016-2019 were adult Syrian refugees in Lebanon and Denmark that arrived up to 12 months prior to inclusion. PTSD was assessed using the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire and the estimate of association was obtained by multiply imputing missing data and adjusting for confounding by propensity score-weighting with covariates age, sex, socioeconomic status, trauma experience and general mental well-being, reporting the bootstrap 95-percentile confidence interval (95% CI). Additionally, a number of sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Included were 599 participants in Lebanon (mean age 35 years old, 73% being female) and 133 participants in Denmark (mean age 30 years old, 47% being female). After multiply imputing missing data and propensity score-weighted adjustment for confounding, migration to Denmark instead of Lebanon was associated with an increase in PTSD prevalence of 9 percentage point (95% CI [-1; 19] percentage point). CONCLUSIONS: Long-distance migration may be associated with an increase in PTSD prevalence in refugees. The migration could be an important factor to consider when assessing refugees' and asylum seekers' health. Practitioners should consider "long-distance migration" in refugee health screenings and in particular when assessing the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder. Future research should be designed to ultimately lead to studies of relevant interventions to lower the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder in refugees.

Early detection and management of prostate cancer has evolved over the past decade, with a focus now on harm minimisation and reducing overdiagnosis and overtreatment, given the proven improvements in survival from randomised controlled trials. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is now an important aspect of the diagnostic pathway in prostate cancer, improving the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, enabling accurate localisation of appropriate sites to biopsy, and reducing unnecessary biopsies in most patients with normal magnetic resonance imaging scans. Biopsies are now performed transperineally, substantially reducing the risk of post-procedure sepsis. Australian-led research has shown that prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has superior accuracy in the staging of prostate cancer than conventional imaging (CT and whole-body bone scan). Localised prostate cancer that is low risk (International Society for Urological Pathology [ISUP] grade 1, Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6; and ISUP grade group 2, Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 with less than 10% pattern 4) can be offered active surveillance, reducing harms from overtreatment. Prostatectomy and definitive radiation remain the gold standard for localised intermediate and high risk disease. However, focal therapy is an emerging experimental treatment modality in Australia in carefully selected patients. The management of advanced prostate cancer treatment has evolved to now include several novel agents both in the metastatic hormone-sensitive and castration-resistant disease settings. Multimodal therapy with androgen deprivation therapy, additional systemic therapy and radiotherapy are often recommended. PSMA-based radioligand therapy has emerged as a treatment option for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and is currently being evaluated in earlier disease states.

Background: innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but various areas of management still lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The 2021 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) addressed some of these questions to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. Objective: to present the voting results from APCCC 2021. Design, setting, and participants: the experts identified three major areas of controversy related to management of advanced prostate cancer: newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the use of prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands in diagnostics and therapy, and molecular characterisation of tissue and blood. A panel of 86 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 107 pre-defined questions, which were developed by both voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. Results and limitations: the voting reflected the opinions of panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material. Conclusions: these voting results from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients to navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised according to patient characteristics, such as the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), comorbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations, and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical eviden, National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Practitioner Fellowship; Prostate Cancer Foundation; Peter MacCallum Foundation; NHMRC Investigator Grant

Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. Patient summary: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients., NA

BACKGROUND: The inclusion criterion for active surveillance (AS) is low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The predictive value of the presence of a suspicious lesion at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the time of inclusion is insufficiently known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the percentage of patients needing active treatment stratified by the presence or absence of a suspicious lesion at baseline MRI. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective analysis of the data from the multicentric AS GAP3 Consortium database was conducted. The inclusion criteria were men with grade group (GG) 1 or GG 2 prostate cancer combined with prostate-specific antigen <20 ng/ml. We selected a subgroup of patients who had MRI at baseline and for whom MRI results and targeted biopsies were used for AS eligibility. Suspicious MRI was defined as an MRI lesion with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS)/Likert ≥3 and for which targeted biopsies did not exclude the patient for AS. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was treatment free survival (FS). The secondary outcomes were histological GG progression FS and continuation of AS (discontinuation FS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The study cohort included 2119 patients (1035 men with nonsuspicious MRI and 1084 with suspicious MRI) with a median follow-up of 23 (12-43) mo. For the whole cohort, 3-yr treatment FS was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69-74). For nonsuspicious MRI and suspicious MRI groups, 3-yr treatment FS rates were, respectively, 80% (95% CI: 77-83) and 63% (95% CI: 59-66). Active treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.0, p < 0.001), grade progression (HR = 1.9, p < 0.001), and discontinuation of AS (HR = 1.7, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the suspicious MRI group than in the nonsuspicious MRI group. CONCLUSIONS: The risks of switching to treatment, histological progression, and AS discontinuation are higher in cases of suspicious MRI at inclusion. PATIENT SUMMARY: Among

Objective: To determine whether the addition of inhaled methoxyflurane to periprostatic infiltration of local anaesthetic (PILA) during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsies (TRUSBs) improved pain and other aspects of the experience. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial, involving 420 men undergoing their first TRUSB. The intervention was PILA plus a patient-controlled device containing either 3 mL methoxyflurane, or 3 mL 0.9% saline plus one drop of methoxyflurane to preserve blinding. The primary outcome was the pain score (0-10) reported by the participant after 15 min. Secondary outcomes included ratings of other aspects of the biopsy experience, willingness to undergo future biopsies, urologists' ratings, biopsy completion, and adverse events. Result(s): The mean (SE) pain scores 15 min after TRUSB were 2.51 (0.22) in those assigned methoxyflurane vs 2.82 (0.22) for placebo (difference 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.75 to 0.14; P = 0.18). Methoxyflurane was associated with better scores for discomfort (difference -0.48, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.03; P = 0.035, adjusted [adj.] P = 0.076), whole experience (difference -0.50, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.08; P = 0.021, adj. P = 0.053), and willingness to undergo repeat biopsies (odds ratio 1.67, 95% CI 1.12-2.49; P = 0.01) than placebo. Methoxyflurane resulted in higher scores for drowsiness (difference +1.64, 95% CI 1.21-2.07; P < 0.001, adj. P < 0.001) and dizziness (difference +1.78, 95% CI 1.31-2.24; P < 0.001, adj. P < 0.001) than placebo. There was no significant difference in the number of >= grade 3 adverse events. Conclusion(s): We found no evidence that methoxyflurane improved pain scores at 15 min, however, improvements were seen in patient-reported discomfort, overall experience, and willingness to undergo repeat biopsies.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU Intern

To date, 18 living recommendations for the clinical care of pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 have been issued by the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce. This includes recommendations on mode of birth, delayed umbilical cord clamping, skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding, rooming-in, antenatal corticosteroids, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, disease-modifying treatments (including dexamethasone, remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and advanced respiratory support interventions (prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Through continuous evidence surveillance, these living recommendations are updated in near real-time to ensure clinicians in Australia have reliable, evidence-based guidelines for clinical decision-making. Please visit https://covid19evidence.net.au/ for the latest recommendation updates.Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Men who initially present with localized prostate cancer and later develop metachronous metastases have a better prognosis than men with de novo metastatic disease and often have a low burden of disease on conventional imaging. Some have disease amenable to metastasis-directed therapy for lymph node or bone metastases, a strategy used by some because no documented overall survival (OS) benefit of combination systemic therapy in this setting. We report data for patients prospectively classified as "M0" at initial diagnosis from the interim analysis of the ENZAMET trial, with 34 mo of median follow-up for survivors. A total of 312 (28%) of the 1125 enrolled patients were classified as M0 at diagnosis, and 205 (66%) of the 312 patients had low-volume disease at study entry as per the CHAARTED criteria. The hazard ratio for OS, that is, HR(OS), was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29-1.06) with the addition of enzalutamide for all patients with metachronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, and for the low-volume subset the HR(OS) was 0.40 (95% CI: 0.16-0.97). The 3-yr OS was 83% without and 89% with enzalutamide for all patients with metachronous metastases, and 83% and 92%, respectively, for the low-volume subset. Intensification of hormonal therapy should strongly be considered for these men. Patient Summary: Many men present with prostate cancer that has spread to distant sites beyond the prostate gland years after their initial diagnosis and treatment, while others have distant spread at the time the cancer is diagnosed. On average, men whose cancer comes back years after the initial diagnosis often survive much longer than men whose cancer has been found to spread to distant sites when it is first diagnosed. In this report, we demonstrate strong evidence for the first time that the survival of men whose cancer comes back years later is improved when drugs such as enzalutamide or apalutamide are added to testosterone suppression in this setting.Cop

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of implementing an integrated multicomponent survivorship care model for men affected by prostate cancer. Method(s): Using a single arm prospective cohort study design, men with prostate cancer were recruited from two regional public hospitals in Australia for a 6-months program that provided information and decision support, exercise and nutrition management, specialised clinical support, and practical support through localised and central care coordination. Carers of the men were also invited to the program. Data were collected from multiple sources to evaluate: (1) recruitment capability and participant characteristics; (2) appropriateness and feasibility of delivering the specific intervention components using an electronic care management tool; and (3) suitability of data collection procedures and proposed outcome measures. Result(s): Of the 105 eligible men, 51 (consent rate 49%) participated in the program. Of the 31 carers nominated by the men, 13 consented (consent rate 42%). All carers and 50 (98%) men completed the program. Most (92%) men were newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer. All men attended initial screening and assessment for supportive care needs; a total of 838 episodes of contact/consultation were made by the intervention team either in person (9%) or remotely (91%). The intervention was implemented as proposed with no adverse events. The proposed outcome measures and evaluation procedures were found to be appropriate. Conclusion(s): Our results support the feasibility of implementing this integrated multicomponent care model for men affected by prostate cancer.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Introduction Active surveillance (AS) for patients with prostate cancer (PC) with low risk of PC death is an alternative to radical treatment. A major drawback of AS is the uncertainty whether a patient truly has low risk PC based on biopsy alone. Multiparametric MRI scan together with biopsy, appears useful in separating patients who need curative therapy from those for whom AS may be safe. Two small clinical trials have shown short-term high-dose vitamin D supplementation may prevent PC progression. There is no substantial evidence for its long-term safety and efficacy, hence its use in the care of men with PC on AS needs assessment. This protocol describes the ProsD clinical trial which aims to determine if oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation taken monthly for 2 years can prevent PC progression in cases with low-to-intermediate risk of progression. Method and analysis This is an Australian national multicentre, 2:1 double-blinded placebo-controlled phase II randomised controlled trial of monthly oral high-dose vitamin D supplementation (50 000 IU cholecalciferol), in men diagnosed with localised PC who have low-to-intermediate risk of disease progression and are being managed by AS. This trial will assess the feasibility, efficacy and safety of supplementing men with an initial oral loading dose of 500 000 IU cholecalciferol, followed by a monthly oral dose of 50 000 IU during the 24 months of AS. The primary trial outcome is the commencement of active therapy for clinical or non-clinical reason, within 2 years of AS. Ethics and dissemination This trial is approved by Bellberry Ethics Committee (2016-06-459). All results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number ACTRN12616001707459.Copyright © BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2021

Background: 68Gallium-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (68Ga-PSMA-11 PET) is a valuable staging tool, but its utility in characterising primary prostate cancer remains unclear. The maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) is a quantification measure of highest radiotracer uptake within PET-avid lesions. Objective(s): To assess the utility of SUVmax in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) on biopsy alone and in combination with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective analysis of 200 men who underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT, mpMRI, and transperineal template prostate biopsy between 2016 and 2018. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary and secondary outcomes were detection of grade group (GG) 3-5 and GG 2-5 prostate cancer, respectively. We used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare SUVmax by GG, and calculated sensitivity and specificity for csPCa detection via 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT, mpMRI, and both. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of csPCa on biopsy. Results and limitations: The median SUVmax was greater for GG 3-5 tumours (6.40, interquartile range [IQR] 4.47-11.0) than for benign and GG 1-2 tumours (3.14, IQR 2.55-3.91; p < 0.001). The median SUVmax was greater for GG 3 (5.70, IQR 3.68-8.67) than for GG 2 (3.47, IQR 2.70-4.74; p < 0.001). For GG 3-5 disease, sensitivity was 86.5%, 95.9%, and 98.6%, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 88.4%, 88.5%, and 93.3% using SUVmax >=4, a Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3-5, and both, respectively. This combined model detected more GG 3-5 disease than mpMRI alone (98.6% vs 95.9%; p = 0.04). SUVmax was an independent predictor of csPCa for GG 3-5 disease only (odds ratio 1.27 per unit, 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.45). Our results are limited by the retrospective study design. Conclusion(s): Greater SU

PURPOSE: Accurate risk stratification remains a barrier for the safety of active surveillance in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (68Ga-PSMA PET/CT) and the maximum Standardized Uptake Value (SUVmax) may improve risk stratification within this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed men with ISUP Grade Group 2-3 disease on transperineal template biopsy undergoing 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT from November 2015 to January 2021. Primary outcome was the presence of high percentage Gleason pattern 4 (GP4) disease per-segment at surgery, at three thresholds: >/<50% GP4, >/<20% GP4, and >/<10% GP4. SUVmax was compared by GP4, and multivariable logistic regression examined the relationship between SUVmax and GP4. Secondary outcome was association between SUVmax and pathologic upgrading (GG1/2 to GG >=3 from biopsy to surgery). RESULT(S): Of 220 men who underwent biopsy, 135 men underwent surgery. SUVmax was higher in high GP4 groups: 5.51 (IQR 4.19-8.49) vs 3.31 (2.64-4.41) >/<50% GP4 (p <0.001); 4.77 (3.31-7.00) vs 3.13 (2.64-4.41) >/<20% GP4 (p <0.001); and 4.54 (6.10-3.13) vs 3.03 (2.45-3.70) >/<10% GP4 (p <0.001). SUVmax remained an independent predictor of >50% (OR=1.39 [95%CI 1.18-1.65], p <0.001) and >20% (OR=1.24 [1.04-1.47], p=0.015) GP4 disease per-segment, and of pathologic upgrading (OR=1.22 [1.01-1.48], p=0.036). SUVmax threshold 4.5 predicted >20% GP4 with 58% specificity, 85% sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) 75% and negative predictive value (NPV) 72%. Threshold 5.4 predicted pathologic upgrading with 91% specificity and NPV 94%. CONCLUSION(S): SUVmax on 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT is associated with GP4. SUVmax may improve risk stratification for men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Preclinical testing is a crucial step in evaluating cancer therapeutics. We aimed to establish a significant resource of patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) of prostate cancer for rapid and systematic evaluation of candidate therapies. The PDX collection comprises 59 tumors collected from 30 patients between 2012-2020, coinciding with availability of abiraterone and enzalutamide. The PDXs represent the clinico-pathological and genomic spectrum of prostate cancer, from treatment-naive primary tumors to castration-resistant metastases. Inter- and intra-tumor heterogeneity in adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine phenotypes is evident from bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing data. Organoids can be cultured from PDXs, providing further capabilities for preclinical studies. Using a 1 x 1 x 1 design, we rapidly identify tumors with exceptional responses to combination treatments. To govern the distribution of PDXs, we formed the Melbourne Urological Research Alliance (MURAL). This PDX collection is a substantial resource, expanding the capacity to test and prioritize effective treatments for prospective clinical trials in prostate cancer.Copyright © 2021, The Author(s).

Abstract Purpose To evaluate outcomes for men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer who were selected for transponder-guided salvage radiotherapy (SRT) to the prostate bed alone by 68Ga-labelled prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (68Ga-PSMA-PET). Methods This is a single-arm, prospective study of men with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level rising to 0.1–2.5 ng/mL following radical prostatectomy. Patients were staged with 68Ga-PSMA-PET and those with a negative finding, or a positive finding localised to the prostate bed, continued to SRT only to the prostate bed alone with real-time target-tracking using electromagnetic transponders. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical relapse (FFBR, PSA > 0.2 ng/mL from the post-radiotherapy nadir). Secondary endpoints were time to biochemical relapse, toxicity and patient-reported quality of life (QoL). Results Ninety-two patients (median PSA of 0.18 ng/ml, IQR 0.12–0.36), were screened with 68Ga-PSMA-PET and metastatic disease was found in 20 (21.7%) patients. Sixty-nine of 72 non-metastatic patients elected to proceed with SRT. At the interim (3-year) analysis, 32 (46.4%) patients (95% CI 34.3–58.8%) were FFBR. The median time to biochemical relapse was 16.1 months. The rate of FFBR was 82.4% for ISUP grade-group 2 patients. Rates of grade 2 or higher gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity were 0% and 15.2%, respectively. General health and disease-specific QoL remained stable. Conclusion Pre-SRT 68Ga-PSMA-PET scans detect metastatic disease in a proportion of patients at low PSA levels but fail to improve FF

Item does not contain fulltext, PURPOSE: We sought to identify and validate known predictors of disease reclassification at 1 or 4 years to support risk-based selection of patients suitable for active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An individual participant data meta-analysis using data from 25 established cohorts within the Movember Foundations GAP3 Consortium. In total 5,530 men were included. Disease reclassification was defined as any increase in Gleason grade group at biopsy at 1 and 4 years. Associations were estimated using random effect logistic regression models. The discriminative ability of combinations of predictors was assessed in an internal-external validation procedure using the AUC curve. RESULTS: Among the 5,570 men evaluated at 1 year, we found 815 reclassifications to higher Gleason grade group at biopsy (pooled reclassification rate 13%, range 0% to 31%). Important predictors were age, prostate specific antigen, prostate volume, T-stage and number of biopsy cores with prostate cancer. Among the 1,515 men evaluated at 4 years, we found 205 reclassifications (pooled reclassification rates 14%, range 3% to 40%), with similar predictors. The average areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve at internal-external validation were 0.68 and 0.61 for 1-year and 4-year reclassification, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Disease reclassification occurs typically in 13% to 14% of biopsies at 1 and 4 years after the start of active surveillance with substantial between-study heterogeneity. Current guidelines might be extended by considering prostate volume to improve individualized selection for active surveillance. Additional predictors are needed to improve patient selection for active surveillance.

Abstract Background Active surveillance (AS) is the disease management option of choice for low-risk prostate cancer. Despite this, men with low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC) find management decisions distressing and confusing. We developed Navigate, an online decision aid to help men and their partners make management decisions consistent with their values. The aims are to evaluate the impact of Navigate on uptake of AS; decision-making preparedness; decisional conflict, regret and satisfaction; quality of illness communication; and prostate cancer-specific quality of life and anxiety. In addition, the healthcare cost impact, cost-effectiveness and patterns of use of Navigate will be assessed. This paper describes the study protocol. Methods Three hundred four men and their partners are randomly assigned one-to-one to Navigate or to the control arm. Randomisation is electronically generated and stratified by site. Navigate is an online decision aid that presents up-to-date, unbiased information on LRPC tailored to Australian men and their partners including each management option and potential side-effects, and an interactive values clarification exercise. Participants in the control arm will be directed to the website of Australia’s peak national body for prostate cancer. Eligible patients will be men within 3 months of being diagnosed with LRPC, aged 18 years or older, and who are yet to make a treatment decision, who are deemed eligible for AS by their treating clinician and who have Internet access and sufficient English to participate. The primary outcome is self-reported uptake of AS as the first-line management option. Secondary outcomes include self-reported preparedness for decision-making; decisional con

BACKGROUND: Before integrating prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) into routine care, it is important to assess if the benefits justify the differences in resource use. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of PSMA-PET/CT when compared with conventional imaging. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was developed using data from the proPSMA study. proPSMA included patients with high-risk prostate cancer assigned to conventional imaging or 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT with planned health economics data collected. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from an Australian societal perspective. INTERVENTION: 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT compared with conventional imaging (CT and bone scan). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome from proPSMA was diagnostic accuracy (nodal and distant metastases). This informed a decision tree analysis of the cost per accurate diagnosis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The estimated cost per scan for PSMA PET/CT was AUD$1203, which was less than the conventional imaging cost at AUD$1412. PSMA PET/CT was thus dominant, having both better accuracy and a lower cost. This resulted in a cost of AUD$959 saved per additional accurate detection of nodal disease, and AUD$1412 saved for additional accurate detection of distant metastases. The results were most sensitive to variations in the number of men scanned for each 68Ga-PSMA-11 production run. Subsequent research is required to assess the long-term costs and benefits of PSMA PET/CT-directed care. CONCLUSIONS: PSMA PET/CT has lower direct comparative costs and greater accuracy compared to conventional imaging for initial staging of men with high-risk prostate cancer. This provides a compelling case for adopting PSMA PET/CT into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: The proPSMA study demonstrated that prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomogra