Does a delay between diagnosis and radical prostatectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence?

MicroRNAs as Predictive Biomarkers in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy: A Narrative Literature Review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies and is associated with high mortality rates worldwide. The underlying mechanism of tumorigenesis in CRC is complex, involving genetic, lifestyle-related, and environmental factors. Although radical resection with adjuvant FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have remained mainstays of treatment for patients with stage III CRC and locally advanced rectal cancer, respectively, the oncological outcomes of these treatments are often unsatisfactory. To improve patients' chances of survival, researchers are actively searching for new biomarkers to facilitate the development of more effective treatment strategies for CRC and metastatic CRC (mCRC). MicroRNAs (miRs), small, single-stranded, noncoding RNAs, can post-transcriptionally regulate mRNA translation and trigger mRNA degradation. Recent studies have documented aberrant miR levels in patients with CRC or mCRC, and some miRs are reportedly associated with chemoresistance or radioresistance in CRC. Herein, we present a narrative review of the literature on the roles of oncogenic miRs (oncomiRs) and tumor suppressor miRs (anti-oncomiRs), some of which can be used to predict the responses of patients with CRC to chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Moreover, miRs may serve as potential therapeutic targets because their functions can be manipulated using synthetic antagonists and miR mimics.

Racial differences in the treatment and outcomes for prostate cancer in Massachusetts

BACKGROUND

Massachusetts is a northeastern state with universally mandated health insurance since 2006. Although Black men have generally worse prostate cancer outcomes, emerging data suggest that they may experience equivalent outcomes within a fully insured system. In this setting, the authors analyzed treatments and outcomes of non-Hispanic White and Black men in Massachusetts.

METHODS

White and Black men who were 20 years old or older and had been diagnosed with localized intermediate- or high-risk nonmetastatic prostate cancer in 2004-2015 were identified in the Massachusetts Cancer Registry. Adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess predictors of definitive therapy. Adjusted and unadjusted survival models compared cancer-specific mortality. Interaction terms were then used to assess whether the effect of race varied between counties.

RESULTS

A total of 20,856 men were identified. Of these, 19,287 (92.5%) were White. There were significant county-level differences in the odds of receiving definitive therapy and survival. Survival was worse for those with high-risk cancer (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.4-1.60) and those with public insurance (adjusted HR for Medicaid, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.38-2.07; adjusted HR for Medicare, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.14-1.35). Black men were less likely to receive definitive therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.74-0.83) but had a 17% lower cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.7-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite lower odds of definitive treatment, Black men experience decreased cancer-specific mortality in comparison with White men in Massachusetts. These data support the growing body of research showing that Black men may achieve outcomes equivalent to or even better than those of White men within the context of a well-insured population.

LAY SUMMARY

There is a growing body of evidence showing that the excess risk of death among Black men with prostate cancer may be caused by disparities in access to care, with few or no disparities seen in universally insured health systems such as the Veterans Affairs and US Military Health System. Therefore, the authors sought to assess racial disparities in prostate cancer in Massachusetts, which was the earliest US state to mandate universal insurance coverage (in 2006). Despite lower odds of definitive treatment, Black men with prostate cancer experience reduced cancer-specific mortality in comparison with White men in Massachusetts. These data support the growing body of research showing that Black men may achieve outcomes equivalent to or even better than those of White men within the context of a well-insured population.

Preoperative exercise interventions to optimize continence outcomes following radical prostatectomy

Urinary incontinence is a common and predictable consequence among men with localized prostate cancer who have undergone radical prostatectomy. Despite advances in the surgical technique, urinary continence recovery time remains variable. A range of surgical and patient-related risk factors contributing to urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy have been described, including age, BMI, membranous urethral length and urethral sphincter insufficiency. Physical activity interventions incorporating aerobic exercise, resistance training and pelvic floor muscle training programmes can positively influence the return to continence in men after radical prostatectomy. Traditional approaches to improving urinary continence after radical prostatectomy have typically focused on interventions delivered during the postoperative period (rehabilitation). However, the limited efficacy of these postoperative approaches has led to a shift from the traditional reactive model of care to more comprehensive interventions incorporating exercise-based programmes that begin in the preoperative period (prehabilitation) and continue after surgery. Comprehensive prehabilitation interventions include appropriately prescribed aerobic exercise, resistance training and specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and exercise training programmes. Transperineal ultrasonography is a non-invasive and validated method for the visualization of the action of the pelvic floor musculature, providing real-time visual biofeedback to the patient during specific pelvic floor muscle instruction and training. Importantly, the waiting time before surgery can be used for the delivery of comprehensive prehabilitation exercise-based interventions to increase patient preparedness in the lead-up to surgery and optimize continence and health-related quality-of-life outcomes following radical prostatectomy.

Impact of "Time-From-Biopsy-to-Prostatectomy" on Adverse Oncological Results in Patients With Intermediate and High-Risk Prostate Cancer

Objective: Many patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) do not immediately undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) after biopsy confirmation. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of “time-from-biopsy-to- prostatectomy” on adverse pathological outcomes.

Materials and Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2019, 437 patients with intermediate- and high risk PCa who underwent RP were retrospectively identified within our prospective institutional database. For the aim of our study, we focused on patients with intermediate- (n = 285) and high-risk (n = 151) PCa using D'Amico risk stratification. Endpoints were adverse pathological outcomes and proportion of nerve-sparing procedures after RP stratified by “time-from-biopsy-to-prostatectomy”: ≤3 months vs. >3 and < 6 months. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) were reported for continuously coded variables. The chi-square test examined the statistical significance of the differences in proportions while the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to examine differences in medians. Multivariable (ordered) logistic regressions, analyzing the impact of time between diagnosis and prostatectomy, were separately run for all relevant outcome variables (ISUP specimen, margin status, pathological stage, pathological nodal status, LVI, perineural invasion, nerve-sparing).

Results: We observed no difference between patients undergoing RP ≤3 months vs. >3 and <6 months after diagnosis for the following oncological endpoints: pT-stage, ISUP grading, probability of a positive surgical margin, probability of lymph node invasion (LNI), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and perineural invasion (pn) in patients with intermediate- and high-risk PCa. Likewise, the rates of nerve sparing procedures were 84.3 vs. 87.4% (p = 0.778) and 61.0% vs. 78.8% (p = 0.211), for intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients undergoing surgery after ≤3 months vs. >3 and <6 months, respectively. In multivariable adjusted analyses, a time to surgery >3 months did not significantly worsen any of the outcome variables in patients with intermediate- or high-risk PCa (all p > 0.05).

Conclusion: A “time-from-biopsy-to-prostatectomy” of >3 and <6 months is neither associated with adverse pathological outcomes nor poorer chances of nerve sparing RP in intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients.

The effect of delaying transperineal fusion biopsy of the prostate for patients with suspicious MRI findings-Implications for the COVID-19 era

Objective

Image guided biopsies are an integral part of prostate cancer evaluation. The effect of delaying biopsies of suspicious prostate mpMRI lesions is uncertain and clinically relevant during the COVID-19 crisis.

We evaluated the association between biopsy delay time and pathologic findings on subsequent prostate biopsy.

Materials and methods

After obtaining IRB approval we reviewed the medical records of 214 patients who underwent image-guided transperineal fusion biopsy of the prostate biopsy between 2017 and 2019.

Study outcomes included clinically significant (ISUP grade group ≥2) and any prostate cancer on biopsy. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between biopsy delay time and outcomes while adjusting for known predictors of cancer on biopsy.

Results

The study cohort included 195 men with a median age of 68. Median delay between mpMRI and biopsy was 5 months, and 90% of patients had a ≤8 months delay. A significant association was found between PI-RADS 5 lesions and no previous biopsies and shorter delay time.

Delay time was not associated with clinically significant or any cancer on biopsy. A higher risk of significant cancer was associated with older age (P = 0.008), higher PSA (0.003), smaller prostate volume (<0.001), no previous biopsy (0.012) and PI-RADS 5 lesions (0.015).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that under current practice, where men with PI-RADS 5 lesions and no previous biopsies undergo earlier evaluation, a delay of up to 8 months between imaging and biopsy does not affect biopsy findings.

In the current COVID-19 crisis, selectively delaying image-guided prostate biopsies is unlikely to result in a higher rate of significant cancer.

Genitourinary cancer management during a severe pandemic: Utility of rapid communication tools and evidence-based guidelines

OBJECTIVES

To determine the usefulness of social media for rapid communication with experts to discuss strategies for prioritization and safety of deferred treatment for urologic malignancies during COVID-19 pandemic, and to determine whether the discourse and recommendations made through discussions on social media (Twitter) were consistent with the current peer-reviewed literature regarding the safety of delayed treatment.

METHODS

We reviewed and compiled the responses to our questions on Twitter regarding the management and safety of deferred treatment in the setting of COVID-19 related constraints on non-urgent care. We chronicled the guidance published on this subject by various health authorities and professional organizations. Further, we analyzed peerreviewed literature on the safety of deferred treatment (surgery or systemic therapy) to make made evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Due to the rapidly changing information about epidemiology and infectious characteristics of COVID-19, the health authorities and professional societies guidance required frequent revisions which by design take days or weeks to produce. Several active discussions on Twitter provided real-time updates on the changing landscape of the restrictions being placed on non-urgent care. For separate discussion threads on prostate cancer and bladder cancer, dozens of specialists with expertise in treating urologic cancers could be engaged in providing their expert opinions as well as share evidence to support their recommendations. Our analysis of published studies addressing the safety and extent to which delayed cancer care does not compromise oncological outcome revealed that most prostate cancer care and certain aspects of the bladder and kidney cancer care can be safely deferred for 2-6 months. Urothelial bladder cancer and advanced kidney cancer require a higher priority for timely surgical care. We did not find evidence to support the idea of using nonsurgical therapies, such as hormone therapy for prostate cancer or chemotherapy for bladder cancer for safer deferment of previously planned surgery. We noted that the comments and recommendations made by the participants in the Twitter discussions were generally consistent with our evidence-based recommendations for safely postponing cancer care for certain types of urologic cancers.

CONCLUSION

The use of social media platforms, such as Twitter, where the comments and recommendations are subject to review and critique by other specialists is not only feasible but quite useful in addressing the situations requiring urgent resolution, often supported by published evidence. In circumstances such as natural disasters, this may be a preferable approach than the traditional expert panels due to its ability to harness the collective intellect to available experts to provide responses and solutions in real-time. These real-time communications via Twitter provided sound guidance which was readily available to the public and participants, and was generally in concordance with the peerreviewed data on safety of deferred treatment.

Impact of time from diagnosis to treatment on erectile function outcomes after radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND

Concerns exist about the effect of delaying treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) regarding both oncological and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of time from diagnosis to RP on post-operative erectile function (EF) outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data for 827 patients treated with RP at a single center from 2002 to 2017. The International Index of Erectile Function-EF (IIEF-EF) was compiled by every patient (EF recovery equal to IIEF-EF ≥ 22). Time from diagnosis to treatment was defined as the interval between biopsy and RP. Cox regression analysis was used to test the impact of time to surgery on the probability of EF recovery. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared the cumulative incidence of EF recovery according to time from diagnosis to surgery. The impact of time to RP on EF was tested also in a sub-cohort of patients eligible for active surveillance (AS).

RESULTS

Overall, low-, intermediate-, and high-risk PCa was found in 306 (37%), 422 (51%), and 99 (12%) patients. Of them, 148 (17.9%) would have been eligible for AS. A total of 152 (18%) and 22 (2.7%) patients were treated after 6 and 12 months from diagnosis. The overall probability of EF recovery was 32% (95% CI: 29-36) at 24 months. Cox regression analysis showed that time from biopsy to surgery was not associated with a different chance of EF recovery (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97-1.05; p = 0.7). At Kaplan-Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of EF recovery did not differ between patients treated within 6 months, from 6 to 12 months and after 12 months from diagnosis. Similar findings were obtained for patients eligible for AS.

DISCUSSION

Patients may be reassured regarding their chance of post-operative EF recovery in the case of a delayed surgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Delaying surgery after PCa diagnosis does not affect post-operative EF recovery outcomes regardless of oncological risk.

Impact of time from biopsy to surgery on complications, functional and oncologic outcomes following radical prostatectomy

Introduction:

To determine the impact of time from biopsy to surgery on outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP) as the optimal interval between prostate biopsy and RP is unknown.

Material and methods:

We identified 7, 350 men who underwent RP at our institution between 1994 and 2012 and had a prostate biopsy within one year of surgery. Patients were grouped into five time intervals for analysis: ≤ 3 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 7-12 weeks, 12-26 weeks, and > 26 weeks. Oncologic outcomes were stratified by NCCN disease risk for comparison. The associations of time interval with clinicopathologic features and survival were evaluated using multivariate logistic and Cox regression analyses.

Results:

Median time from biopsy to surgery was 61 days (IQR 37, 84). Median follow-up after RP was 7.1 years (IQR 4.2, 11.7) while the overall perioperative complication rate was 19.7% (1,448/7,350). Adjusting for pre-operative variables, men waiting 12-26 weeks until RP had the highest likelihood of nerve sparing (OR: 1.45, p = 0.02) while those in the 4-6 week group had higher overall complications (OR: 1.33, p = 0.01). High risk men waiting more than 6 months had higher rates of biochemical recurrence (HR: 3.38, p = 0.05). Limitations include the retrospective design.

Conclusions:

Surgery in the 4-6 week time period after biopsy is associated with higher complications. There appears to be increased biochemical recurrence rates in delaying RP after biopsy, for men with both low and high risk disease.

Impact of serious mental illness on the treatment and mortality of older patients with locoregional high-grade (nonmetastatic) prostate cancer: retrospective cohort analysis of 49 985 SEER-Medicare patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2013

Background

The influence of serious mental illness (SMI) on the treatment and survival of patients with high‐grade prostate cancer is not well understood. We compared the initial cancer treatment and cancer‐specific mortality of SEER‐Medicare patients with locoregional high‐grade (nonmetastatic) prostate cancer with and without preexisting SMI.

Methods

We identified SEER‐Medicare patients who were 67 years of age or older diagnosed between 2006 and 2013 with locoregional high‐grade (nonmetastatic) prostate cancer. Preexisting SMI was identified by claims indicative of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and other psychotic disorder, during the 2 years before cancer diagnosis. We used multivariable binary logistic regression to examine associations between SMI and receipt of surgery or radiation concurrent with hormone therapy (definitive initial treatment) within 1 year after cancer diagnosis. We used Kaplan‐Meier survival curves, as well as Cox proportional hazards and competing risk models to evaluate unadjusted and adjusted associations between SMI and 5‐year cancer‐specific survival.

Results

Among 49 985 patients with locoregional high‐grade (nonmetastatic) prostate cancer, 523 (1.1%) had SMI and 49 462 (98.9%) had no SMI. Overall, SMI was associated with reduced odds of receiving surgery (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49‐0.89) or radiation concurrent with hormone therapy (OR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67‐0.98) as initial treatments in the year after cancer diagnosis. Additionally, SMI was associated with higher hazard of 5‐year cancer‐specific death (HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.06‐1.89) after accounting for competing risks of non‐cancer death.

Conclusion

Among SEER‐Medicare patients with locoregional high‐grade (nonmetastatic) prostate cancer, those with preexisting SMI—relative to those without these conditions—were less likely to receive definitive initial treatment in the year after diagnosis and had poorer cancer‐specific survival 5 years after diagnosis.

Evaluating the impact of length of time from diagnosis to surgery in patients with unfavourable intermediate-risk to very-high-risk clinically localised prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of length of time from diagnostic biopsy to radical prostatectomy (RP) on oncological outcomes amongst men diagnosed with unfavourable intermediate- to very-high-risk clinically localised prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of men with a diagnosis of grade group (GG) ≥3 prostate cancer on biopsy, who underwent RP within 6 months of diagnosis, at our institution between 2005 and 2018. We assessed patient demographics, pre-biopsy disease characteristics, and receipt of neoadjuvant therapy. We categorised time between biopsy and RP into two intervals: <3 and 3-6 months. For each GG, we compared receipt of adjuvant therapy, pathological outcomes at RP (positive surgical margin [PSM], extraprostatic extension [EPE], seminal vesicle invasion [SVI], and lymph node involvement [LNI]), risk of 2- and 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS), and 2-, 5-, and 10-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) between patients who underwent RP at <3 vs 3-6 months after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Amongst 2303 men who met the study inclusion criteria, 1244 (54%) had GG 3, 608 (26%) had GG 4, and 451 (20%) had GG 5 disease. In all, 72% underwent RP at <3 months after diagnosis. For each diagnostic GG, there was no significant difference in rates of adjuvant therapy, PSM, EPE, SVI, or LNI in men who had RP at <3 vs 3-6 months after diagnosis. In all, 1568 men had follow-up after RP of >1 year. For each diagnostic GG, there was no significant difference in 2- and 5-year BCRFS between patients who had RP at <3 vs 3-6 months after diagnosis (GG 3: 78% vs 83% and 69% vs 66%, respectively, P = 0.6; GG 4: 68% vs 74% and 51% vs 57%, respectively, P = 0.4; GG 5: 58% vs 74% and 48% vs 54%, respectively, P = 0.2). Similarly, for each diagnostic GG, there was no significant difference in 2-, 5-, and 10-year MFS between patients who had RP at <3 vs 3-6 months after diagnosis, although we were not able to calculate 10-year MFS for patients with GG 5 disease due to limited follow-up in that group (GG 3: 98%, 92%, and 84% vs 97%, 95%, and 91%, respectively, P = 0.4; GG 4: 97%, 90%, and 72% vs 94%, 91%, and 81%, respectively, P = 0.8; GG 5: 89% and 81% vs 91% and 71%, respectively, P = 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Waiting for RP up to 6 months after diagnosis is not associated with adverse outcomes amongst patients with unfavourable intermediate- to very-high-risk prostate cancer.

Optimizing Time to Treatment to Achieve Durable Biochemical Disease Control after Surgery in Prostate Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of treatment delays on prostate cancer-specific outcomes remains ill-defined. This study investigates the effect of time to treatment on biochemical disease control after prostatectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective study includes 1,807 patients who received a prostatectomy as a primary treatment at two large tertiary referral centers from 1987 to 2015. Multivariate cox model with restricted cubic spline was used to identify optimal time to receive treatment and estimate the risk of biochemical recurrence.

RESULTS

Median follow-up time of the study was 46 (interquartile range, 18-86) months. Time to treatment was subcategorized based on multivariate cubic spline cox model. In multivariate spline model, adjusted for all the pertinent pretreatment variables, inflection point in the risk of biochemical recurrence was observed around 3 months, which further increased after 6 months. Based on spline model, time to treatment was then divided into 0 to 3 months (61.5%), >3 to 6 months (31.1%), and 6 months (7.4%). In the adjusted cox model, initial delays up to 6 months did not adversely affect the outcome; however, time to treatment >6 months had significantly higher risk of biochemical recurrence (HR, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-2.60; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The initial delays up to 6 months in prostate cancer primary treatment may be sustainable without adversely affecting the outcome. However, significant delays beyond 6 months can unfavorably affect biochemical disease control.

IMPACT

Time to treatment can aid clinicians in the decision-making of prostate cancer treatment recommendation and educate patients against unintentional treatment delays.

HER1-based vaccine: Simultaneous activation of humoral and cellular immune response

The human epidermal growth factor receptor 1 (HER1) is a tumor-associated antigen that has been validated as a clinical target for several passive, non-immune therapies currently approved for the treatment of epithelial tumors. HER1 is an oncogene that not only promotes tumor progression and survival, but also immune escape. Its overexpression in some epithelial malignancies has been correlated with a poor prognosis. We developed an approach to target HER1 by specific active immunotherapy, recognizing the extracellular domain of the receptor, using a combination of VSSP and Montanide ISA 51 as adjuvants. We summarize the results obtained with this vaccine in both the preclinical and clinical settings, emphasizing the importance of the induction of both humoral and cellular responses for the success of cancer vaccines as safe therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of cancer.

Poor prognosis of bladder cancer patients with occult lymph node metastases treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy

OBJECTIVES

To characterise the outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) pre-treated patients found to be lymph node (LN)-positive at the time of radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (RC/PLND) for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of 1484 patients treated with RC/PLND for UCB from 2000 to 2010, we analysed 198 patients with clinically non-metastatic (cN0M0) muscle-invasive UCB who were found to be LN-positive at RC/PLND. As patients not receiving perioperative chemotherapy were significantly older and comorbid, we compared LN-positive patients previously treated with NAC (32 patients) to LN-positive patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (AC, 49 patients) using Cox proportional hazards models. A sensitivity analysis was designed to account for the additional time to RC in NAC patients.

RESULTS

The 3-year recurrence-free survival estimate for LN-positive NAC patients was 26%, compared with 60% for LN-positive AC patients. LN-positive patients treated with NAC had significantly higher risks of disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality in univariate analyses (hazard ratio [HR] 2.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-5.19, P = 0.001 and HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.34-4.65, P = 0.004, respectively) and multivariable analyses adjusting for pathological stage and LN density (HR 3.11, 95% CI 1.59-6.07, P = 0.001 and HR 3.05, 95% CI 1.46-6.35, P = 0.003, respectively). Sensitivity analyses similarly demonstrated worse outcomes for NAC pre-treated LN-positive patients.

CONCLUSION

LN-positive patients previously treated with NAC have a poor prognosis, significantly worse than LN-positive patients subsequently treated with AC, and should be considered for protocols using sandwich chemotherapy approaches or novel agents. These results should be considered in the interpretation of and stratification for clinical trials.

Time between diagnosis and surgical treatment on pathological and clinical outcomes in prostate cancer: does it matter?

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer (PC) most of the time presents with an indolent course. Thus, delays in treatment due to any causes might not affect long-term survival and may not affect cancer cure rates.

PURPOSE

In this study, we evaluated the effect of delay-time between PC diagnosis and radical prostatectomy regarding oncological outcomes: Gleason score upgrade on surgical specimen, pathologic extracapsular extension (ECE) on surgical specimen, and postoperative biochemical recurrence (BCR) on follow-up.

METHODS

We evaluated PC patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) regarding clinical and pathological findings and theirs respective interval between diagnosis and surgical treatment measured in days and months. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the impact of interval-time.

RESULTS

A total of 908 PC patients underwent RP between 2006 and 2014. Mean age was 61.5 years, the mean time-to-surgery was 191 days (> 6 months) and 187 (20.5%) patients had BCR, with a mean follow-up of 44 months. According to our analysis, no statistically significant maximum cut-off time interval between diagnostic biopsy and surgery could be established (p = 0.215). Regardless of interval-time: ≤ 6 months (56.5%), 6-12 months (38.5%), and > 12 months (5.1%) after biopsy, we found no time interval correlated with poor oncological outcomes. This study has several limitations. It was retrospective and had a mean follow-up of 4 years. Additional follow-up is necessary to determine whether these findings will be maintained over time.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that the time between diagnosis and surgical treatment did not affect the oncological outcomes in our study.

No clinical significance of the time interval between biopsy and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer on biochemical recurrence: a propensity score matching analysis

Purpose

To investigate the impact of the time interval (TI) between prostate biopsy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on the risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 793 consecutive patients who were treated with RARP at our institution. Patients were divided into three groups, according to TI, to compare BCR-free survival (BCRFS) rates: Group 1 (n = 196), TI < 3 months; Group 2 (n = 513), 3 ≤ TI < 6 months; Group 3 (n = 84), TI ≥ 6 months. Eighty-three patients with TI ≥ 6 months were matched with an equal number of patients with TI < 6 months based on propensity scores by using four preoperative factors: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), primary (pGS) and secondary (sGS) Gleason score and positive prostate biopsy.

Results

The 5-year BCRFS rates for TI Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 76%, 80.7% and 82.6% (P = 0.99), respectively. The multivariate analysis revealed that PSA, pGS, sGS and a positive prostate biopsy were independent preoperative risk factors for BCR. The propensity adjusted 5-year BCRFS for patients with TI ≥ 6 months was 84.0%. This was not worse than that of patients with TI < 6 months (71.0%, P = 0.18).

Conclusions

In our cohorts, a delay in the time from biopsy to RARP did not significantly affect recurrence. Therefore, hasty treatment decisions are unnecessary for at least 6 months after diagnosis of early prostate cancer.

Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort

AIM

We sought to explore the impact of surgical wait time (SWT) to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on biochemical recurrence (BCR).

METHOD

Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database between 2006 and 2015 was conducted on all RARP cases. SWT was defined as period from prostate biopsy to surgery. Primary outcome was the impact on BCR, which was defined as two consecutive PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/dl, or salvage external beam radiation therapy and/or salvage androgen deprivation therapy. Patients were stratified according to D'Amico risk categories. Univariable analysis (UVA) and multivariable analyses (MVA) with a Cox proportional hazards regression model were used to evaluate the effect of SWT and other predictive factors on BCR, in each D'Amico risk group and on the overall collective sample.

RESULTS

Patients eligible for analysis were 619. Mean SWT was 153, 169, 150, and 125 days, for overall, low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis on the overall cohort did not show a significant relation between SWT and BCR. On subgroup analysis of D'Amico risk group, SWT was positively correlated to BCR for high-risk group (p = 0.001). On threshold analysis, cut-off was found to be 90 days. SWT did not significantly affect BCR on UVA and MVA in the low- and intermediate-risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Increased delay to surgery could affect the BCR, as there was a positive association in high-risk group. Further studies with longer follow-up are necessary to assess the impact of wait time on BCR, cancer specific survival and overall survival.

Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect patient pathological outcome? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort

INTRODUCTION

We sought to assess the impact of surgical wait time (SWT) to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on final pathological outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective review of RARP patient records operated between 2006 and 2015 was conducted. SWT was defined as period from prostate biopsy to surgery. Primary outcome was the impact on postoperative Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA-S) score. Patients were stratified according to D'Amico risk categories. Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) analysis with a generalized linear model was used to evaluate the effect of SWT and other predictive factors on pathological outcome in individual risk group and on the overall sample.

RESULTS

A total of 835 patients were eligible for analysis. Mean SWT was significantly different between the three D'Amico groups, with mean SWT of 180.22 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 169.03; 191.41), 159.14 days (95% CI 152.38; 165.90), and 138.96 days (95% CI 124.60; 153.33) for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively (p<0.001). After stratification by D'Amico risk group, no significant association was observed between SWT and CAPRA-S score in the three risk categories on UVA and MVA. Predictors of higher CAPRA-S score in the multivariable model in the overall cohort were: older age (p=0.014), biopsy Gleason score (p<0.001), percentage of positive cores (p<0.001), and clinical stage (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study evaluating SWT for RARP in a Canadian socialized system, increased delay for surgery does not appear to impact the pathological outcome. Further studies are required to evaluate the impact of wait time on biochemical recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival.

High blood sugar levels significantly impact the prognosis of colorectal cancer patients through down-regulation of microRNA-16 by targeting Myb and VEGFR2

The high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in colorectal cancer patients is a crucial public health issue worldwide. The deregulation of microRNAs has been shown to be associated with the progression of CRC; however, the effects of high blood sugar levels on miR deregulation and, in turn, CRC remain unexplored. In this study, 520 CRC patients were classified into two groups according to their blood sugar levels (≧110 or <110 mg/dL). Clinicopathologic features, clinical outcomes, and serum miR-16 levels of the two groups were then analyzed, while cell cycles, cell proliferation, migration, and cellular miR-16 expression were investigated via D-(+)-glucose administration. Additionally, the target genes of miR-16 were identified. Through multivariate analysis, both the disease-free survival and overall survival of the CRC patients were found to be associated with the UICC stage, perineural invasion, and blood glucose levels (P < 0.05). Serum miR-16 levels were significantly lower in the high blood glucose patients than in the normal blood glucose patients (P = 0.0329). With D-(+)-glucose administration, the proliferation and migration of CRC cells in vitro increased remarkably (P < 0.05), while their accumulation in the G1 phase decreased significantly. Cellular miR-16 expression was suppressed by D-(+)-glucose administration. The expression levels of two target genes, Myb and VEGFR2, were affected significantly by miR-16, while glucose administration inhibited miR-16 expression and enhanced tumor cell proliferation and migration. Hyperglycemia can impact the clinical outcomes of CRC patients, likely by inhibiting miR-16 expression and the expression of its downstream genes Myb and VEGFR2.

Prostate cancer outcomes and delays in care

OBJECTIVES

To examine the survival effect of treatment delays from the time of confirmed diagnosis of prostate cancer to first treatment in an Australian population.

METHODS

Three thousand one hundred and forty patients were identified from the South Australian Prostate Cancer Clinical Outcomes Collaborative database for analysis. Selected patients had dates recorded for both diagnosis and treatment. We examined the effect of treatment delay (the time from diagnosis to date of first treatment) on survival using Cox and competing risks regression and compared quartiles of delay across the cohort. Adjustment was made for age, PSA levels, treatment modality and Gleason score. Outcomes included overall survival (OS) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM).

RESULTS

Quartiles of delay were as follows (days)-Q1: 35, Q2: 86, Q3: 138.0, Q4: 264. Shorter delays were associated with hormonal treatment, high Gleason score and high PSA values. Measuring PCSM with Q2 as reference, age-adjusted associations were-Q1: sHR 4.37 (2.75-6.94), Q3: sHR 1.29 (0.73-2.28), Q4: sHR 1.55 (0.91-2.63). After additional adjustment for treatment type, Gleason score and PSA, Q1 remained at increased risk [sHR 2.46 (1.10-5.54)]. A similar trend was observed for OS. In analysis stratified by Gleason score, delays were not significantly associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with shorter delay in treatment include high Gleason score, high PSA and hormonal treatment. After adjustment for these variables, increased delays were not associated with OS or PCSM in this cohort. The nonlinear association of delay with risk may explain conflicting reports in the literature.

Evaluating the effect of time from prostate cancer diagnosis to radical prostatectomy on cancer control: Can surgery be postponed safely?

OBJECTIVE

To test the prognostic role of treatment delay in patients affected by prostate cancer (PCa).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 2,653 patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) at a single institution between 2006 and 2011. The evaluated outcomes were biochemical recurrence (BCR) and clinical recurrence (CR). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to test the association between time from diagnosis to RP and oncological outcomes. Nonparametric curve fitting methods were used to graphically explore the relationship between time from diagnosis to RP and oncological outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were repeated in the subgroups of low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients.

RESULTS

At median follow-up of 56 months (interquartile range: 26, 92), 283 patients experienced BCR, and 84 patients developed CR. Median time from PCa diagnosis to surgery was 2.8 months (interquartile range: 1.6, 4.7). At multivariable Cox regression analysis, time from biopsy to RP was significantly associated with an increased risk of BCR (hazard ratio = 1.02, P = 0.0005) and CR (hazard ratio = 1.03, P = 0.0002). Using Nonparametric curve fitting methods, a significant increased risk of BCR and CR after approximately 18 months was observed. However, when sensitivity analyses were repeated according to risk groups, this effect was maintained in high-risk patients only, and such time interval was reduced to 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the overall trend on higher rate of cancer relapse after RP, the effect of treatment delay from biopsy to RP was significantly evident in high-risk patients only. Even in high-risk patients surgical treatment can be postponed safely, but not beyond the 12-month landmark.

Second opinions from urologists for prostate cancer: Who gets them, why, and their link to treatment

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are encouraged to obtain second opinions before starting treatment. Little is known about men with localized prostate cancer who seek second opinions, the reasons why, and the association with treatment and quality of care.

METHODS

We surveyed men who were diagnosed with localized prostate cancer in the greater Philadelphia area from 2012 to 2014. Men were asked if they obtained a second opinion from a urologist, and the reasons why. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the relationship between second opinions and definitive prostate cancer treatment and perceived quality of care.

RESULTS

A total of 2386 men responded to the survey (adjusted response rate, 51.1%). After applying exclusion criteria, the final analytic cohort included 2365 respondents. Of these, 40% obtained second opinions, most commonly because they wanted more information about their cancer (50.8%) and wanted to be seen by the best doctor (46.3%). Overall, obtaining second opinions was not associated with definitive treatment or perceived quality of cancer care. Men who sought second opinions because they were dissatisfied with their initial urologist were less likely to receive definitive treatment (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.73), and men who wanted more information about treatment were less likely to report excellent quality of cancer care (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.99) compared with men who did not receive a second opinion.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a large proportion of men with localized prostate cancer obtained a second opinion, the reasons for doing so were not associated with treatment choice or perceived quality of cancer care. Future study is needed to determine when second opinions contribute to increasing the value of cancer care. Cancer 2017;123:1027-34. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Effects of Time to Treatment on Biochemical and Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Definitive Radiation

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate if time to treatment (TTT) has an effect on outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 4064 patients (1549 low-risk, 1612 intermediate-risk, and 903 high-risk) treated with EBRT. For each National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group, TTT (defined as the time between initial positive prostate biopsy and start of RT) was analyzed in 4 intervals: < 3, 3-6, 6-9, and 9-24 months. We recorded the use of androgen deprivation therapy among patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk disease.

RESULTS

The median TTT was 3.3 months (range, 0.6-23.5 months), and it was similar for each risk group (range, 3.3-3.4 months). The median follow up was 64 months. There were no significant differences in biochemical failure, distant metastasis, or overall survival for patients with TTT < 3, 3-6, 6-9, or 9-24 months for each risk group. There were also no significant differences in the outcomes at 5 years when patients with TTT > 3.3 months were compared with those with TTT ≤ 3.3 months for each risk group. For high-risk men, 328 of 450 (72.9%) with TTT > 3.3 months were on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus 299 of 453 (66%) with TTT ≤ 3.3 months. Among men with high-risk cancer treated without ADT, there remained no significant difference in outcomes between TTT > 3.3 months and TTT ≤ 3.3 months.

CONCLUSION

TTT was not associated with significant differences in outcomes among each risk group of men with localized prostate cancer treated with EBRT. Among the high-risk patients, there were no observed detriments in outcomes with TTT > 3.3 months regardless of androgen deprivation therapy use.

Racial Disparity in Time Between First Diagnosis and Initial Treatment of Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disparities among patients with prostate cancer exist across the continuum of care. The interval of time that lapses between first diagnosis and treatment is another disparity that may exist but has not been fully explored.

METHODS

Our study looked at the data of 749 men (353 black and 396 white) who were 40 to 81 years of age when they entered the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry during the years 2007 and 2008. Our dependent variable was the amount of months that had passed between first diagnosis and treatment. Our main independent variable was self-reported race. Covariates included age, income, level of education, insurance status, treatment received, Gleason score, and level of medical mistrust. We used negative binomial regression analysis to determine the association between the amount of time that lapsed between a diagnosis of prostate cancer and treatment by race.

RESULTS

Compared with white men, black men were more likely to experience a longer wait time between diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.36). Controls for demographical, clinical, and psychosocial variables (IRR 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.43) did not explain this difference between the races.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the amount of time that lapses between first diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer is longer for black men compared with white men. Our findings have identified an underreported racial disparity in the disease continuum of prostate cancer.

Delay from biopsy to radical prostatectomy influences the rate of adverse pathologic outcomes

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine maximum wait times between biopsy diagnosis and surgery for localized prostate cancer, beyond which the rate of adverse pathologic outcomes is increased.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 4,610 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy between 1990 and 2011. Patients were stratified by biopsy Gleason score and PSA value. For each stratification, χ2 analysis was used to determine the smallest 15-day multiple of surgical delay (e.g., 15, 30, 45…180 days) for which adverse pathologic outcomes were significantly more likely after the time interval than before. Adverse outcomes were defined as positive surgical margins, upgrading from biopsy, upstaging, seminal vesicle invasion, or positive lymph nodes.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred twelve patients met inclusion criteria. Median delay was 64 days (mean 76, SD 47). One thousand six hundred seventy-five (75.7%), 537 (24.3%), and 60 (2.7%) patients had delays of <=90, >90, and >180 days, respectively. Twenty-six percent were upgraded on final pathology and 23% were upstaged. The positive surgical margin rate was 24.2% and the positive lymph node rate was 1.1%. Significant increases in the proportion of adverse pathological outcomes were found beyond 75 days in the overall cohort (P = 0.03), 150 days for patients with Gleason <=6, and PSA 0-10 (P = 0.038), 60 days for patients with Gleason 7 and PSA >20 (P = 0.032), and 30 days for patients with Gleason 8-10 and PSA 11-20 (0.041).

CONCLUSION

In low-risk disease, there is a considerable but not unlimited surgical delay which will not adversely impact the rate of adverse pathologic features found. In higher risk disease, this time period is considerably shorter.

Long-term oncological outcomes of a phase II trial of neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy followed by radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localised, high-risk prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine long-term oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) after neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy (CHT) for clinically localised, high-risk prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this phase II multicentre trial of patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PSA level >20 ng/mL, Gleason ≥8, or clinical stage ≥T3), androgen-deprivation therapy (goserelin acetate depot) and paclitaxel, carboplatin and estramustine were administered before RP. We report the long-term oncological outcomes of these patients and compared them to a contemporary cohort who met oncological inclusion criteria but received RP only.

RESULTS

In all, 34 patients were enrolled and followed for a median of 13.1 years. Within 10 years most patients had biochemical recurrence (BCR-free probability 22%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 10-37%). However, the probability of disease-specific survival at 10 years was 84% (95% CI 66-93%) and overall survival was 78% (95% CI 60-89%). The CHT group had higher-risk features than the comparison group (123 patients), with an almost doubled risk of calculated preoperative 5-year BCR (69% vs 36%, P < 0.01). After adjusting for these imbalances the CHT group had trends toward improvement in BCR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.43-1.34; P = 0.3) and metastasis-free survival (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.24-1.29; P = 0.2) although these were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant CHT followed by RP was associated with lower rates of BCR and metastasis compared with the RP-only group; however, these results were not statistically significant. Because this treatment strategy has known harms and unproven benefit, this strategy should only be instituted in the setting of a clinical trial.

Development and clinical validation of an in situ biopsy-based multimarker assay for risk stratification in prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer aggressiveness and appropriate therapy are routinely determined following biopsy sampling. Current clinical and pathologic parameters are insufficient for accurate risk prediction leading primarily to overtreatment and also missed opportunities for curative therapy.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

An 8-biomarker proteomic assay for intact tissue biopsies predictive of prostate pathology was defined in a study of 381 patient biopsies with matched prostatectomy specimens. A second blinded study of 276 cases validated this assay's ability to distinguish "favorable" versus "nonfavorable" pathology independently and relative to current risk classification systems National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN and D'Amico).

RESULTS

A favorable biomarker risk score of ≤0.33, and a nonfavorable risk score of >0.80 (possible range between 0 and 1) were defined on "false-negative" and "false-positive" rates of 10% and 5%, respectively. At a risk score ≤0.33, predictive values for favorable pathology in very low-risk and low-risk NCCN and low-risk D'Amico groups were 95%, 81.5%, and 87.2%, respectively, higher than for these current risk classification groups themselves (80.3%, 63.8%, and 70.6%, respectively). The predictive value for nonfavorable pathology was 76.9% at biomarker risk scores >0.8 across all risk groups. Increased biomarker risk scores correlated with decreased frequency of favorable cases across all risk groups. The validation study met its two coprimary endpoints, separating favorable from nonfavorable pathology (AUC, 0.68; P < 0.0001; OR, 20.9) and GS-6 versus non-GS-6 pathology (AUC, 0.65; P < 0.0001; OR, 12.95).

CONCLUSIONS

The 8-biomarker assay provided individualized, independent prognostic information relative to current risk stratification systems, and may improve the precision of clinical decision making following prostate biopsy.

Evidence and Clinical Relevance of Tumor Flare in Patients Who Discontinue Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Several tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and one monoclonal antibody targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor (VEGFR) axis have been approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Preclinical data suggest that cessation of anti-VEGF therapy may generate a tumor flare (TF) but its clinical relevance is still questionable.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis investigates the occurrence of tumor flare and its prognostic role after discontinuation of anti-VEGFR TKIs in patients affected by mRCC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients with mRCC treated with first-line sunitinib or pazopanib at standard dosages were screened. Patients included in the analysis were required to have: (1) discontinued treatment because of progression of disease or intolerable toxicity or sustained response; (2) evaluation of tumor growth rates immediately before (GR1) and after discontinuation (GR2); and (3) no treatment during evaluation of GR2.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Overall survival (OS) was the main outcome. TF was calculated as the difference between the GR values (TF=GR2 - GR1). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the prognostic role.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Sixty-three consecutive patients were analyzed; the median duration of treatment was 9.3 mo, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.1 mo, and the median OS was 41.5 mo. The reasons for treatment discontinuation were sustained response (partial response/stable disease) in 15.9%, toxicity in 22.2%, and progression of disease in 61.9% of cases. The median GR1 and GR2 were 0.16cm/mo (interquartile range [IQR] -0.07 to 0.53) and 0.70cm/mo (IQR 0.21-1.46), respectively (p=0.001). In the overall population, the median TF was 0.55cm/mo (IQR 0.08-1.22) and differed according to the reason for discontinuation: 0.15cm/mo for response, 0.95cm/mo for toxicity, and 1.66cm/mo for progression. When TF was compared to other prognostic variables, Cox analysis confirmed its prognostic role (hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.001-1.225; p=0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reports clinical evidence that TKI discontinuation results in acceleration of tumor GR and induces TF, which can negatively affect the prognosis of mRCC patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report, we looked at the outcomes for patients affected by metastatic kidney tumors who discontinued treatment with antiangiogenic agents. We found that tumor regrowth after discontinuation of therapy was related to the reason for discontinuation: regrowth was higher in patients who discontinued treatment because of disease progression, and lower in patients who discontinued treatment because of a sustained response. Moreover, we found that the higher the growth rate, the shorter the survival. We conclude that discontinuation of antiangiogenic agents may cause an increase in tumor growth rate, which is related to patient survival.

Does the time from biopsy to radical prostatectomy affect Gleason score upgrading in patients with clinical t1c prostate cancer?

PURPOSE

It is debated whether treatment delay worsens oncologic results in localized prostate cancer (PCa). Few studies have focused on the role of a delay between the time of biopsy and the time of surgery. Thus, we aimed to investigate the effect of the time period between biopsy and surgery on Gleason score upgrading (GSU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 290 patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy in Ankara Training and Research Hospital were included in the study. The biopsy Gleason score, age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value, prostate volumes, and PSA density (PSAD) were analyzed in all patients. The patients were divided into two groups: patients with GSU (group 1) and patients without GSU (group 2). Variables having a p-value of ≤0.05 in the univariate analysis were selected and then evaluated by use of multivariate logistic regression models. Results were considered significant at p<0.05.

RESULTS

GSU occurred in 121 of 290 patients (41.7%). The mean age of the patients was 66.0±7.2 years in group 1 and 65.05±5.60 years in group 2 (p=0.18). The mean PSA values of groups 1 and 2 were 8.6±4.1 and 8.8±4.3 ng/dL, respectively. The mean prostate volumes of groups 1 and 2 were 43.8±14.1 and 59.5±29.8 mL, respectively. The PSAD of group 1 was significantly higher than that of group 2 (0.20 vs. 0.17, p=0.003). The mean time to surgery was shorter in group 2 (group 1, 52.2±22.6 days; group 2, 45.3±15.5 days; p=0.004). According to the logistic regression, time from biopsy to surgery is important in the prediction of GSU.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that the time period between biopsy and surgery is a significant factor that affects GSU in patients with clinically localized PCa.

Clinical significance of microRNA-148a in patients with early relapse of stage II stage and III colorectal cancer after curative resection

Development of robust prognostic/predictive biomarkers in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is imperative for advancing treatment strategies for this disease. We aimed to determine whether expression status of microRNAs might be a simple and reliable biomarker to detect postoperative early relapse in patients with CRC after radical resection. We used microRNA arrays and identified that microRNA-148a (miRNA-148a) had substantially different expression levels in early and nonearly relapsed stage II and III CRC tissues. The validation study, which included 55 early relapsed patients and 55 nonearly relapsed patients, further confirmed overexpression of miRNA-148a in nonearly relapsed samples. Subsequently, we explored whether the serum level of miRNA-148a can be used to predict early CRC recurrence. The in vitro and in vivo effects of miRNA-148a were examined by cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, as well as cell cycles, and xenograft in null mice. Last, miRNA-148a was investigated as a potential biomarker for identifying early relapse. Cellular studies demonstrated that the overexpression of miRNA-148a inhibited colon cancer cell proliferation and migration but not invasion. The cell cycle studies also revealed that miRNA-148a caused an accumulation of the G2 population. Moreover, lower levels of miRNA-148a expression were associated with significantly shorter disease-free survival rates and poorer overall survival rates. This study showed that miRNA-148a can inhibit tumorigenesis and reduce the early recurrence of CRC. These findings suggest that miRNA-148a may have potential clinical applications for predicting the early relapse of patients with CRC after radical resection.

Can delayed time to referral to a tertiary level urologist with an abnormal PSA level affect subsequent Gleason grade in the opportunistically screened population?

PURPOSE

There is growing conflict in the literature describing the effect of delayed treatment on outcomes following radical prostatectomy. There is also evidence to suggest progression of low-risk prostate cancer to develop higher grades and volumes of prostate cancer during active surveillance. It is unknown as to what affect a delay in referral of those men with abnormal screened-PSA levels have on subsequent Gleason grade.

METHODS

We identified 350 men through our rapid access prostate clinic who underwent TRUS biopsy for abnormal age-related PSA and/or abnormal clinical examination. Clinicopathological findings were compared for those with positive versus negative TRUS biopsies, and for those with initial delays in referral (<12 months, 12-18 months, and >18 months). We used ANOVA and Student's t-tests amongst other statistical tools to examine significance of clinical findings.

RESULTS

Of the 350 men who underwent TRUS biopsy, those with a delay in referral of 12 months or more were significantly associated with higher PSA titers, clinically palpable disease and likelihood of diagnosis with prostate cancer. A delay of 18 months or more led to a significantly higher risk of being diagnosed with a leading grade 4 prostate cancer, which was further supported using PSA velocity as a diagnostic tool (change >0.4 ng/ml/year).

CONCLUSION

We recommend that repeated asymptomatic abnormal age-related PSA readings and/or abnormal clinical examination in the screened population be referred without delay to a urologist for further assessment, enrolment into an active surveillance program or definitive subsequent treatment.

Impact of the length of time between diagnosis and surgical removal of urologic neoplasms on survival

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess the effect of surgical wait time on the survival of patients with urological neoplasms, including prostate, bladder, penile, and testicular cancers and upper tract tumours (UTUC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Current, relevant studies were identified from the literature. Keywords used for article retrieval were as follows: delay; surgery; prostate cancer; urothelial carcinoma; renal cell carcinoma; testicular cancer; bladder; renal pelvis; ureter; and survival.

RESULTS

Regarding the length of surgical wait time, it does not matter in cases of incidental T1a renal cell carcinomas. In other cases of renal cell carcinomas, surgery should be considered within <1 month; it is of crucial importance in bladder cancer and should be <1 month for a TURBT in cases of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and <1 month for a radical cystectomy in cases of muscle-invasive bladder cancer; it is important in invasive UTUC and should be <1 month for a radical nephroureterectomy; it is not crucial in cases of low-risk prostate cancer. In any other case, radical prostatectomy should be considered within <2 months; it is important in testicular cancer and should be fewer than 10 days for an orchiectomy.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged surgical wait times have an impact on the overall quality of life and anxiety of the patient. Extending the wait time beyond a given threshold can also have a negative impact on the patient's clinical outcomes, but this threshold differs between urological neoplasms.

Delayed radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with biochemical recurrence: possible implications for active surveillance from the SEARCH database

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly accepted as appropriate management for low-risk prostate cancer (PC) patients. It is unknown whether delaying radical prostatectomy (RP) is associated with increased risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR) for men with intermediate-risk PC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 1,561 low and intermediate-risk men from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) database treated with RP between 1988 and 2011. Patients were stratified by interval between diagnosis and RP (≤ 3, 3-6, 6-9, or >9 months) and by risk using the D'Amico classification. Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyze BCR. Logistic regression was used to analyze positive surgical margins (PSM), extracapsular extension (ECE), and pathologic upgrading.

RESULTS

Overall, 813 (52%) men were low-risk, and 748 (48%) intermediate-risk. Median follow-up among men without recurrence was 52.9 months, during which 437 men (38.9%) recurred. For low-risk men, RP delays were unrelated to BCR, ECE, PSM, or upgrading (all P > 0.05). For intermediate-risk men, however, delays >9 months were significantly related to BCR (HR: 2.10, P = 0.01) and PSM (OR: 4.08, P < 0.01). Delays >9 months were associated with BCR in subsets of intermediate-risk men with biopsy Gleason score ≤ 3 + 4 (HR: 2.51, P < 0.01), PSA ≤ 6 (HR: 2.82, P = 0.06), and low tumor volume (HR: 2.59, P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

For low-risk men, delayed RP did not significantly affect outcome. For men with intermediate-risk disease, delays >9 months predicted greater BCR and PSM risk. If confirmed in future studies, this suggests delayed RP for intermediate-risk PC may compromise outcomes.

Timing of curative treatment for prostate cancer: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Delaying definitive therapy unfavourably affects outcomes in many malignancies. Diagnostic, psychological, and logistical reasons but also active surveillance (AS) strategies can lead to treatment delay, an increase in the interval between the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarise the current literature on the impact of treatment delay on PCa oncologic outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase databases until 30 September 2012 was performed. Studies comparing pathologic, biochemical recurrence (BCR), and mortality outcomes between patients receiving direct and delayed curative treatment were included. Studies presenting single-arm results following AS were excluded.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Seventeen studies were included: 13 on radical prostatectomy, 3 on radiation therapy, and 1 combined both. A total of 34 517 PCa patients receiving radical local therapy between 1981 and 2009 were described. Some studies included low-risk PCa only; others included a wider spectrum of disease. Four studies found a significant effect of treatment delay on outcomes in multivariate analysis. Two included low-risk patients only, but it was unknown whether AS was applied or repeat biopsy triggered active therapy during AS. The two other studies found a negative effect on BCR rates of 2.5-9 mo delay in higher risk patients (respectively defined as any with T ≥ 2b, prostate-specific antigen >10, Gleason score >6, >34-50% positive cores; or D'Amico intermediate risk-group). All studies were retrospective and nonrandomised. Reasons for delay were not always clear, and time-to-event analyses may be subject to bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment delay of several months or even years does not appear to affect outcomes of men with low-risk PCa. Limited data suggest treatment delay may have an impact on men with non-low-risk PCa. Most AS protocols suggest a confirmatory biopsy to avoid delaying treatment in those who harbour higher risk disease that was initially misclassified.

Is a treatment delay in radical prostatectomy safe in individuals with low-risk prostate cancer?

INTRODUCTION

Many patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (PCa) are presented with several treatment modalities, which may require time to understand these options before making an informed decision regarding treatment.

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of radical prostatectomy (RP) delay on postoperative functional outcomes and mortality in a North American population-based cohort.

METHODS

Overall, 17,153 men treated with RP for non-metastatic clinical stage T1-2, low-grade PCa between years 1995 and 2005 within the U.S. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare-linked database were abstracted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The effect of treatment delay (from PCa diagnosis to RP of >3 months) on pathological upstaging at surgery (≥pT3) and postoperative functional outcomes (urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction) was examined using logistic regression analyses. The 10-year PCa mortality rates were computed using cumulative incidence rates.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,576 (15%) patients underwent RP > 3 months after diagnosis. A treatment delay of >3 months was associated with a 24% and 33% higher rate of erectile dysfunction diagnosis and procedure, respectively (both P ≤ 0.001). Treatment delay was also associated with 6% higher rate of urinary incontinence procedure (P = 0.01). Furthermore, a dose-response effect was detected with respect to increasing durations of RP delay (≤3 vs. 3-5 vs. 5-9 vs. ≥9 months) the rates of erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence diagnoses/procedures. Treatment delay was not associated with pathological upstaging and PCa mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Customarily, the timing of RP following biopsy is dictated by tumor aggressiveness. In general, patients with more unfavorable characteristics are operated sooner. This may obliterate the potential detriments of delayed RP. The treatment delay between biopsy and RP may result in more extensive periprostatic tissue resection and may adversely affect postoperative continence and erectile function.

MicroRNA-93 inhibits tumor growth and early relapse of human colorectal cancer by affecting genes involved in the cell cycle

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with high recurrence and mortality. Because deregulation of microRNAs is associated with CRC development and recurrence, the expression levels of microRNAs can be a simple and reliable biomarker to detect postoperative early relapse, thereby helping physicians to treat high-risk patients more efficiently.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We used microRNA arrays and observed that microRNA-93 had substantially different expression levels in early (recurrence within 12 months after surgery) and non-early relapse CRC patients. The replication study, which included 35 early relapse and 42 non-early relapse subjects, further confirmed overexpression of microRNA-93 in non-early relapse samples. The in vitro and in vivo effects of microRNA-93 were investigated by examining cell proliferation, migration and invasion, as well as cell cycles, target-gene expression and xenograft in null mice.

RESULTS

Cellular studies showed that the overexpression of microRNA-93 inhibited colon cancer cell proliferation and migration but not invasion. The cell cycle studies also revealed that microRNA-93 caused an accumulation of the G2 population. However, microRNA-93 could not induce cell apoptosis or necrosis. Functional studies showed that microRNA-93 could suppress CCNB1 protein expression leading to cell cycle arrest in the G2 phase. Moreover, microRNA-93 repressed expression of ERBB2, p21 and VEGF, all of which are involved in cell proliferation. MicroRNA-93 also suppressed tumor growth in null mice.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that microRNA-93 can inhibit tumorigenesis and reduce the recurrence of CRC; these findings may have potential clinical applications for predicting the recurrence of CRC.

[Complications and nerve preservation in prostatectomy according to the time interval from diagnostic biopsy]

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the available evidence on complications and bilateral nerve preservation in radical prostatectomy in patients according to the time interval from diagnostic biopsy (more or less than six weeks).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Relevant studies were identified by using structured and specific search strategies for each of the databases consulted, without limitations. The methodological quality of each of the studies included was evaluated and the data were extracted independently.

RESULTS

For open radical prostatectomy, two of the studies concluded that a time interval of less than 4 or 6 weeks between prostate biopsy and surgery had no influence on the postsurgical complications rate or on nerve preservation during surgery. For laparoscopic robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, the study included concluded that performing this type of intervention in an interval of less than 4 or 6 weeks after diagnostic biopsy was associated with a higher risk of postsurgical complications. However, all these studies had major methodological limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

The time interval between diagnostic biopsy and open surgery has no influence on the complications rate or nerve preservations. In contrast, an interval of less than 4 weeks between diagnostic biopsy and laparoscopic surgery is associated with a higher risk of surgical complications.

Effect of delaying surgery on radical prostatectomy outcomes: a contemporary analysis

Study Type - Therapy (case series). Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? For patients electing surgical treatment, the question of the effect of surgical delay on clinical outcomes in prostate cancer is controversial. In this study we examined the effect of delay from diagnosis to surgery on outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer and found no association between time to surgery and risk of biochemical recurrence, even for patients with longer delays and high-risk disease. Men with localized prostate cancer can be reassured that reasonable delays in treatment will not influence disease outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

• To examine the effect of time from last positive biopsy to surgery on clinical outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• We conducted a retrospective review of 2739 men who underwent RP between 1990 and 2009 at our institution. • Clinical and pathological features were compared between men undergoing RP ≤ 60, 61-90 and >90 days from the time of prostate biopsy. • A Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyse the association between clinical features and surgical delay with biochemical progression. Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free rates were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

• Of the 1568 men meeting the inclusion criteria, 1098 (70%), 303 (19.3%) and 167 (10.7%) had a delay of ≤ 60, 61-90 and >90 days, respectively, between biopsy and RP. A delay of >60 days was not associated with adverse pathological findings at surgery. • The 5-year survival rate was similar among the three groups (78-85%, P= 0.11). • In a multivariate Cox model, men with higher PSA levels, clinical stages, Gleason sums, and those of African-American race were all at higher risk for developing BCR. • A delay to surgery of >60 days was not associated with worse biochemical outcomes in a univariate and multivariate model.

CONCLUSIONS

• A delay of >60 days is not associated with adverse pathological outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer, nor does it correlate with worse BCR-free survival. • Patients can be assured that delaying treatment while considering therapeutic options will not adversely affect their outcomes.

Delay of surgery in men with low risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Treatment options for patients with low risk prostate cancer include radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and active surveillance. Among patients treated with radical prostatectomy, prior studies have demonstrated significantly higher biochemical progression rates with surgical delays of 6 months or greater. We determined the impact of surgical delay on radical prostatectomy outcomes specifically in low risk patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From our radical prostatectomy database we identified men who fulfilled the D'Amico low risk criteria (clinical stage T1c/T2a, prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml, and biopsy Gleason 6 or less). Pathological tumor features and biochemical progression rates were compared between men with and without surgical delay. We used Cox proportional hazards models to examine predictors of biochemical progression.

RESULTS

Of 1,111 men who fulfilled the D'Amico low risk criteria, those with a surgical delay of 6 months or more were significantly older, had a higher proportion of African American men, and a lower proportion of clinical stage T2a (vs T1). A surgical delay of 6 months or more was associated with a greater risk of high grade disease at prostatectomy (p = 0.001) and biochemical progression (p = 0.04). The progression-free survival rate was significantly lower among men with a surgical delay. On multivariate analysis with prostate specific antigen and clinical stage, surgical delays of 6 months or more were significantly and independently associated with time to biochemical progression.

CONCLUSIONS

In men who met the D'Amico low risk criteria, a surgical delay of 6 months or more was associated with significantly worse radical prostatectomy outcomes, including more pathology upgrading and a higher rate of biochemical progression. Low risk patients choosing to defer initial definitive therapy should be counseled regarding the possibility of worse treatment outcomes at a later date.

Surgery confounds biology: the predictive value of stage-, grade- and prostate-specific antigen for recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a function of surgeon experience

Statistical models predicting cancer recurrence after surgery are based on biologic variables. We have shown previously that prostate cancer recurrence is related to both tumor biology and to surgical technique. Here, we evaluate the association between several biological predictors and biochemical recurrence across varying surgical experience. The study included two separate cohorts: 6,091 patients treated by open radical prostatectomy and an independent replication set of 2,298 patients treated laparoscopically. We calculated the odds ratios for biological predictors of biochemical recurrence-stage, Gleason grade and prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-and also the predictive accuracy (area under the curve, AUC) of a multivariable model, for subgroups of patients defined by the experience of their surgeon. In the open cohort, the odds ratio for Gleason score 8+ and advanced pathologic stage, though not PSA or Gleason score 7, increased dramatically when patients treated by surgeons with lower levels of experience were excluded (Gleason 8+: odds ratios 5.6 overall vs. 13.0 for patients treated by surgeons with 1,000+ prior cases; locally advanced disease: odds ratios of 6.6 vs. 12.2, respectively). The AUC of the multivariable model was 0.750 for patients treated by surgeons with 50 or fewer cases compared to 0.849 for patients treated by surgeons with 500 or more. Although predictiveness was lower overall for the independent replication set cohort, the main findings were replicated. Surgery confounds biology. Although our findings have no direct clinical implications, studies investigating biological variables as predictors of outcome after curative resection of cancer should consider the impact of surgeon-specific factors.

Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?

The use of MRI in prostate cancer management is controversial and current guidelines underplay its role. Technological advances over the past 5 years, however, demand a re-evaluation of this position. In this article, we propose an increased use of MRI, not only in those with a diagnosis of prostate cancer but also for men before a prostate biopsy. The use of MRI before a biopsy can serve as a triage test in men with raised serum prostate-specific antigen levels, in order to select those for biopsy with significant cancer that requires treatment. This strategy could avoid biopsy, and hence unnecessary treatment, in those with no disease or insignificant cancer. In addition, avoidance of postbiopsy artifact caused by hemorrhage will lead to better local staging accuracy, while determining more accurately the disease burden. This approach could improve risk stratification by selecting those who require adjuvant therapy or dose escalation. Furthermore, MRI evaluation of cancer burden could be important in active surveillance regimens to select those needing intervention.

Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation for prostate volume reduction: the optimal duration in prostate cancer radiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

For locally advanced prostate cancer, the results of radiotherapy are improved by combination with androgen deprivation therapy. Volume reduction achieved with neoadjuvant hormonal treatment can facilitate dose escalation without increasing the toxicity. The optimal duration of hormonal treatment, however, is unknown. The endpoint of this study is the optimal duration of androgen deprivation for prostate volume reduction in a cohort of patients scheduled for external beam radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty patients scheduled for external beam radiotherapy with cT2-3No/xMo prostate cancer were treated with a luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonist (busereline) and nonsteroidal anti-androgen (nilutamide) for 9 months consecutively. Repeated CT scan examination was performed 3-monthly to measure prostate volumes until the start of radiation therapy. The analysis of volume reduction was performed with the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

RESULTS

The baseline median prostate volume for the cohort of patients was 82 cc (95% CI: 61-104 cc) with a median volume reduction of 31% (95% CI: 26%-35%) (P < 0.0001) after 3 months of androgen deprivation. Between 3 and 6 months, a median volume reduction of 9% (95% CI: 4%-14%) (P < 0.0001) was observed. The effect was more pronounced in large prostates (>60 cc) than in small prostates (≤60 cc). In the total cohort of patients no significant volume reduction occurred between 6 and 9 months of maximal androgen blockade (MAB).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we have shown that the most significant prostate volume reduction is achieved after 3 months of MAB with a maximum reduction after 6 months. Therefore, the optimal duration of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation to reduce prostate volume before prostate cancer radiotherapy is 6 months. In small prostates 3 months of hormonal treatment may be enough for maximal volume reduction.