Timing and delay of radical prostatectomy do not lead to adverse oncologic outcomes: results from a large European cohort at the times of COVID-19 pandemic

Impact of the COVID-19 Prioritization Recommendations on Pathological Stages of Urologic Malignancies: A Real-World Analysis at a High-Volume Referral Institution

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines defined priority groups to guide the prioritization of surgery for urological malignancies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 prioritization recommendations on tumor pathological characteristics in a real-world setting at our academic referral institution. Methods: We compared baseline and pathological tumor features of all patients with urological malignancies treated during the pandemic period (2020-2021) versus in the post-pandemic period (2022-2023). Our institution adhered to the international recommendations and prioritized those cases defined as "high-risk". Results: Data from 9196 patients treated for urological malignancies were reviewed and grouped according to period of surgery (4401 in the pandemic period vs. 4785 in the post-pandemic period). The overall number of surgical procedures was comparable for all diseases except for the number of radical prostatectomies (1117 vs. 1405; p = 0.03) and partial nephrectomies (609 vs. 759; p = 0.02), which were significantly lower in the pandemic period. Regarding tumor pathological features, none of the recorded variables were found to differ according to period of surgery, including disease stage, tumor grading, presence of necrosis, lymphovascular invasion, and histological variants. Conclusions: A correct policy of prioritization of oncological pathologies during emergency periods and a centralization of oncological cases in reference centers reduce the possible risk of worsening cancer disease features related to the reorganization of healthcare resources.

The first detailed annual record on the National Clinical Database Urology Division in Japan: A report on five surgical procedures

OBJECTIVES

The National Clinical Database (NCD) Urology Division commenced registration in April 2018 in Japan. This is the first report to focus on five surgeries for which detailed information is registered.

METHODS

We herein describe annual trends in and the complication grades of the following five surgeries: partial nephrectomy, radical nephrectomy, radical cystectomy, radical prostatectomy, and pyeloplasty, using the NCD. A total of 149 417 patients treated with the five types of surgeries based on NCD data were enrolled in this report.

RESULTS

The number of patients was 55 630 for partial/radical nephrectomy from April 2018 to December 2021, 83 653 for radical prostatectomy from April 2018 to December 2021, and 9342 for radical cystectomy from January 2020 to December 2021. In 2021, partial nephrectomy was performed on 7416 cases, radical nephrectomy on 7739 cases, radical prostatectomy on 22 692 cases, radical cystectomy on 4677 cases, and pyeloplasty on 792 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results obtained showed that a robot-assisted or laparoscopic procedure has replaced open surgery as the common approach for all five surgeries. An analysis of NCD data may be useful for understanding trends in surgical procedures across the major field of urology.

Impact of the coronavirus disease pandemic on robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and urologists' treatment behaviors: A single tertiary center retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic affected the outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and urologists' treatment behaviors.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined the medical records of 208 patients who had undergone RARP between August 2017 and December 2022. We compared the rate of preoperative androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), waiting period for RARP, patients' baseline characteristics and quality of life (QOL), proportion of adverse pathology on the RARP specimen, rate of Gleason grade group upgrading from biopsy to the RARP specimen, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence-free survival between the pre-pandemic and pandemic groups.

RESULTS

The rate of preoperative ADT was significantly higher during than before the COVID-19 pandemic (13.7% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.002). The baseline physical and mental QOL scores did not differ significantly between the groups. The proportion of D'Amico low-risk patients was significantly lower (13.6% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.005) and waiting period for RARP was significantly shorter (median 3.5 months vs. 4.0 months, p = 0.016) in the pandemic group than in the pre-pandemic group. There was no significant difference in the proportion of adverse pathology between the groups (p = 0.104); however, the upgrading rate was significantly higher in the pre-pandemic group (p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in PSA recurrence-free survival between the groups (log-rank, p = 0.752).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic did not adversely affect the oncologic outcomes of RARP and QOL before RARP. However, it caused urologists to increase the use of preoperative ADT and to reserve RARP for higher-risk cases.

The impact of delayed diagnosis and treatment due to COVID-19 on Australian thyroid cancer patients: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

The study aims to investigate the perceptions of patients with thyroid cancer on the potential impact of diagnosis and treatment delays during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

This study involved qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, analysed using the thematic framework analysis method and reported using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research.

SETTING

Participants in the study were treated and/or managed at hospital sites across New South Wales and Victoria, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

17 patients with thyroid cancer were interviewed and included in the analysis (14 females and 3 males).

RESULTS

The delays experienced by patients ranged from <3 months to >12 months. The patients reported about delays to diagnostic tests, delays to surgery and radioactive iodine treatment, perceived disease progression and, for some, the financial burden of choosing to go through private treatment to minimise the delay. Most patients also reported not wanting to experience delays any longer than they did, due to unease and anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights an increased psychological burden in patients with thyroid cancer who experienced delayed diagnosis and/or treatment during COVID-19. The impacts experienced by patients during this time may be similar in the case of other unexpected delays and highlight the need for regular clinical review during delays to diagnosis or treatment.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on delivery of prostate cancer care in Australia: An interrupted time series analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a major disruption to health services across the world. The aim of this population-based study was to assess the downstream effects of the pandemic on diagnostic tests and treatment activities related to prostate cancer (PC). The Australian Government Department of Health Medicare Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme databases were queried from January 2010 to June 2022. Two interrupted time series were performed Pre-COVID (January 2010 to February 2020) and peri-COVID (March 2020 to June 2022). Temporal modeling was performed to account for seasonal variation. Pre-COVID-19, monthly prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing showed a declining trend and testing decreased by 81 tests per 100 000 annually. A single-month 38% drop in PSA testing was observed in April 2020; this corresponded to Australia's first wave. No change was observed in the rate of prostate biopsies. Peri-COVID-19 outbreaks, there was a slight shift toward the use of long-acting androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) at 4% with a predilection still for short-acting agents. with no registered change in the overall volume of radiotherapy or surgery. There were no deficits in the number of diagnostic and treatment activities for men with PC. Aside from a slight shift toward long-acting ADT use during the pandemic, no other patterns were observed. The longer-term impact such as missed diagnosis or late presentation affecting chances of survival due to COVID-19 is yet to be ascertained.

Delays in diagnosis and surgery of sarcoma patients during the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain

Background and objectives

Social distancing and quarantine implanted during the COVID-19 outbreak could have delayed the accession of oncologic patients to hospitals and treatments. This study analysed the management of sarcoma patients during this period in five Spanish hospitals.

Design and methods

Clinical data from adult sarcoma patients, soft tissue and bone sarcomas, managed during the COVID-19 outbreak, from 15 March to 14 September 2020 (Covid cohort), were retrospectively collected and time for diagnosis, surgery and active treatments were compared with sarcoma patients managed during the same pre-pandemic period in 2018 (Control cohort).

Results

A total of 126 and 182 new sarcoma patients were enrolled in the Covid and Control cohorts, respectively, who were mainly diagnosed as soft tissue sarcomas (81.0% and 80.8%) and at localized stage (80.2% and 79.1%). A diagnostic delay was observed in the Covid cohort with a median time for the diagnosis of 102.5 days (range 6-355) versus 83 days (range 5-328) in the Control cohort (p = 0.034). Moreover, a delay in surgery was observed in cases with localized disease from the Covid cohort with a median time of 96.0 days (range 11-265) versus 54.5 days (range 2-331) in the Control cohort (p = 0.034). However, a lower delay for neoadjuvant radiotherapy was observed in the Covid cohort with a median time from the diagnosis to the neoadjuvant radiotherapy of 47 days (range 27-105) versus 91 days (range 27-294) in the Control cohort (p = 0.039). No significant differences for adjuvant radiotherapy, neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant/adjuvant palliative chemotherapy were observed between both cohorts. Neither progression-free survival (PFS) nor overall survival (OS) was significantly different.

Conclusion

Delays in diagnosis and surgery were retrospectively observed in sarcoma patients during the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain, while the time for neoadjuvant radiotherapy was reduced. However, no impact on the PFS and OS was observed.

Healthcare in England was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic across the pancreatic cancer pathway: A cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP

Background

Healthcare across all sectors, in the UK and globally, was negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We analysed healthcare services delivered to people with pancreatic cancer from January 2015 to March 2023 to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

With the approval of NHS England, and drawing from a nationally representative OpenSAFELY-TPP dataset of 24 million patients (over 40% of the English population), we undertook a cohort study of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. We queried electronic healthcare records for information on the provision of healthcare services across the pancreatic cancer pathway. To estimate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, we predicted the rates of healthcare services if the pandemic had not happened. We used generalised linear models and the pre-pandemic data from January 2015 to February 2020 to predict rates in March 2020 to March 2023. The 95% confidence intervals of the predicted values were used to estimate the significance of the difference between the predicted and observed rates.

Results

The rate of pancreatic cancer and diabetes diagnoses in the cohort was not affected by the pandemic. There were 26,840 people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from January 2015 to March 2023. The mean age at diagnosis was 72 (±11 SD), 48% of people were female, 95% were of White ethnicity, and 40% were diagnosed with diabetes. We found a reduction in surgical resections by 25-28% during the pandemic. In addition, 20%, 10%, and 4% fewer people received body mass index, glycated haemoglobin, and liver function tests, respectively, before they were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. There was no impact of the pandemic on the number of people making contact with primary care, but the number of contacts increased on average by 1-2 per person amongst those who made contact. Reporting of jaundice decreased by 28%, but recovered within 12 months into the pandemic. Emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and deaths were not affected.

Conclusions

The pandemic affected healthcare in England across the pancreatic cancer pathway. Positive lessons could be learnt from the services that were resilient and those that recovered quickly. The reductions in healthcare experienced by people with cancer have the potential to lead to worse outcomes. Current efforts should focus on addressing the unmet needs of people with cancer.

Funding

This work was jointly funded by the Wellcome Trust (222097/Z/20/Z); MRC (MR/V015757/1, MC_PC-20059, MR/W016729/1); NIHR (NIHR135559, COV-LT2-0073), and Health Data Research UK (HDRUK2021.000, 2021.0157). This work was funded by Medical Research Council (MRC) grant reference MR/W021390/1 as part of the postdoctoral fellowship awarded to AL and undertaken at the Bennett Institute, University of Oxford. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS England, UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), or the Department of Health and Social Care. Funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.

The Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Genitourinary Cancers Stage and Grade

INTRODUCTION

Our study aims to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of uro-oncological surgeries (cystectomy, nephrectomy, prostatectomy, orchiectomy, and transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT)) and pathological staging and grading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study is a retrospective study on patients with genitourinary cancers treated from 2018 to 2021 in a referral tertiary center. The data were obtained from the hospital records with lengths of 22 and 23 months, labeled hereafter as non-COVID and COVID pandemic, respectively (2018/3/21-2020/1/20 and 2020/1/21-2021/12/21). The total number of registered patients, gender, age, stage, and grade were compared in the targeted periods. Moreover, all the pathologic slides were reviewed by an expert uropathologist before enrolling in the study. The continuous and discrete variables are reported as mean (standard deviation (SD)) and number (percent) and the χ2 test for the comparison of the discrete variables' distribution.

RESULTS

In this study total number of 2077 patients were enrolled. The number of procedures performed decreased during the Covid pandemic. The tumors' distribution stage and grade and patients' baseline characteristics were not significantly different in non-COVID and COVID pandemic periods for Radical Nephrectomy, Radical Cystectomy, Radical Prostatectomy, and orchiectomy. For TURBT only, the tumor stage was significantly different (P-value<.001) from the higher stages in the COVID pandemic period.

CONCLUSION

Among urinary tract cancers, staging of bladder cancer and TURBT are mainly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic with higher stages compared to the non-COVID period. We evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of uro-oncological surgeries based on pathological staging and grading. Total number of 2077 patients were enrolled. Among urinary tract cancers, staging of bladder cancer and TURBT are mainly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic with higher stages compared to the non-COVID period.

Impact of COVID-19 on Uro-Oncological Patients: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Background: The aim of this paper is to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on patients with urological malignancies (prostate cancer, bladder and upper tract urothelial cancer, kidney cancer, penile and testicular cancer) and to review the available recommendations reported in the literature. Methods: A review was performed, through the PubMed database, regarding available recommendations reported in the literature, to identify studies examining the impact of COVID-19 on treatment and clinical outcomes (including upstaging, recurrence, and mortality) for uro-oncological patients. Results: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically changed the urological guidelines and patients' access to screening programs and follow-up visits. Great efforts were undertaken to guarantee treatments to high-risk patients although follow up was not always possible due to recurrent surges, and patients with lower risk cancers had to wait for therapies. Conclusions: Physically and mentally, uro-oncological patients paid a heavy price during the COVID-19 pandemic. Long term data on the "costs" of clinical decisions made during the COVID-19 pandemic are still to be revealed and analyzed.

Can We Identify Patients in Danger of Delayed Treatment? Management of COVID-19 Pandemic Backlog in Urology Care in Poland

The COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on healthcare systems around the world. This study aims to research the course of surgical treatment in urology during the pandemic in 2020, evaluate the volume of deferred treatment in urology in Poland, and indicate groups of patients that are especially vulnerable to a delay in the delivery of healthcare services. The National Health Found statistics (NHF) database was searched for information on procedures completed in urology departments from 2015 to 2020. Changes in hospital discharges of adults from 2019 to 2021 were investigated using monthly reports of NHF on patient billing groups. Statistics of PSA, testosterone, and creatinine testing were extracted from NHF reports. Annual changes in the number of surgeries were calculated. Then, the estimation of the expected quantity of procedures without the occurrence of the pandemic was performed using linear regression based on data from 2015 to 2020. The estimation was assumed reliable at R² > 0.8. The difference between collected and estimated data was analysed. In 2020, the volume of radical prostatectomies, cystectomies, and kidney surgeries noted downturns following lockdowns in March and November. All analysed procedures, except radical cystectomy, noted a reduction in the entire year. The declines reached -34% in shockwave lithotripsy, -13% in ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy, -22% in cystolithotripsy, -28% in percutaneous lithotripsy, -12% in transurethral resection of a bladder tumour (TURBT), -31% in transurethral resection of the prostate, -15% in nephrectomy and kidney tumorectomy, and -10% in radical prostatectomy. Among the analysed procedures, only radical cystectomy rates increased 5%. Prostate-specific antigen and creatinine tests fell -17%, and testosterone testing was down -18%. In conclusion, the patients most vulnerable to delayed treatment due to the post-pandemic backlog are those requiring TURBT, kidney cancer operations, and radical prostatectomies. Solving backlogs in urology should prioritise cancer patients and thus requires improved access to cystoscopy, TURBT, diagnoses and surgery of prostate and kidney tumours. Addressing the needs of patients suffering from benign diseases demands appropriate measures to increase the surgical productivity of urology departments.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic influenced prostate cancer?-a tertiary single-centre analysis of oncological results, diagnosis and treatment times

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected care for diseases like cancer. The aim was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on waiting times for diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer (PC), as well as the possible effect on the treatment results in PC patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Methods

We compared the results of 497 patients who underwent biopsy prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (1 January-31 December 2019) with those of 290 patients biopsied during the COVID-19 pandemic (1 January-31 December 2020). Demographic data, tumour characteristics, type of treatment and diagnosis times were comparable. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels were recorded at consultation prior to biopsy and after treatment. Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests were used to compare continuous variables and percentages, respectively.

Results

In 2020, there were fewer urology consultations (35,160 vs. 40,225 in 2019). The median PSA in 2020 was significantly higher (14.3 vs. 9.9 ng/dL in 2019). In 2019, 53.1% (N=264) of the biopsies were positive for cancer vs. 47.2% (N=137) in 2020 (P=0.104). In 2020, more patients presented with metastatic disease (7.3% vs. 1.9%, P=0.009). Also, in 2020 there was a longer waiting time for prostate biopsy (42.1 vs. 35.3 days in 2019, P=0.019). A total of 132 patients underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LARP). The median time until surgery was similar in both years (71.9 vs. 58.29 days). During 2020, a higher percentage of patients had ISUP grade 4 in the surgical specimen (34.3% vs. 17.5%, P=0.07). Furthermore, a higher percentage of aggressive (pT3) tumours were diagnosed (37.2% vs. 27.2%, P=0.08), and the percentage of patients with involvement of surgical margins was also higher (48.6% vs. 29.3%, P=0.027). There were no differences between the groups in terms of biochemical recurrence or persistent PSA at one year (P=0.711).

Conclusions

Delayed biopsy during the COVID-19 period did not appear to adversely impact biopsy results. Patients biopsied in 2020 had higher PSA, possibly due to proper triaging. A higher rate of adverse pathology outcomes was observed in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy during the pandemic, probably due to understaging of the biopsy. This study serves to raise awareness of the risk of deterioration of care of PC patients due to possible underdiagnosis.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective and Emergency Inpatient Procedure Volumes in Switzerland - A Retrospective Study Based on Insurance Claims Data

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) pandemic forced hospitals to redistribute resources for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet the impact on elective and emergency inpatient procedure volumes is unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed anonymized data on 234 921 hospitalizations in 2017-2020 (55.9% elective) from a big Swiss health insurer. We used linear regression models to predict, based on pre-pandemic data, the expected weekly numbers of procedures in 2020 in the absence of a pandemic and compared these to the observed numbers in 2020. Compensation effects were investigated by discretely integrating the difference between the two numbers over time.

RESULTS

During the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, elective procedure numbers decreased by 52.9% (95% confidence interval -64.5% to -42.5%), with cardiovascular and orthopedic elective procedure numbers specifically decreasing by 45.5% and 72.4%. Elective procedure numbers normalized during summer with some compensation of postponed procedures, leaving a deficit of -9.9% (-15.8% to -4.5%) for the whole year 2020. Emergency procedure numbers also decreased by 17.1% (-23.7% to -9.8%) during the first wave, but over the whole year 2020, net emergency procedure volumes were similar to control years.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient procedure volumes in Switzerland decreased considerably in the beginning of the pandemic but recovered quickly after the first wave. Still, there was a net deficit in procedures at the end of the year. Health system leaders must work to ensure that adequate access to non-COVID-19 related care is maintained during future pandemic phases in order to prevent negative health consequences.

The Impact of the Ongoing COVID-19 Epidemic on the Increasing Risk of Adverse Pathology in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy

We aimed to assess whether the ongoing course of the COVID-19 epidemic has been associated with an increased risk of adverse pathology (AP) findings in prostate cancer (PC) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We performed a retrospective data analysis which included 408 consecutive, non-metastatic, previously untreated PC patients who underwent RP in our institution between March 2020 and September 2021. Patients were divided into two equally numbered groups in regard to the median surgery date (Early Epidemic [EE] and Late Epidemic [LE]) and compared. Adverse pathology was defined as either grade group (GG) ≥ 4, pT ≥ 3a or pN+ at RP. Patients in the LE group demonstrated significantly higher rates of AP than in the EE group (61 vs. 43% overall and 50 vs. 27% in preoperative non-high-risk subgroup, both p < 0.001), mainly due to higher rates of upgrading. On multivariable analysis, consecutive epidemic week (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.00−1.03, p = 0.009) as well as biopsy GG ≥ 2 and a larger prostate volume (mL) were associated with AP in non-high-risk patients. The study serves as a warning call for increased awareness of risk underassessment in contemporarily treated PC patients.

The impact of COVID-19 on surgical volume and surgical training at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed most health services. As a result, many surgeries have been deferred and diagnoses delayed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume pelvic oncology centre.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of clinical activity from 2017 to 2020. We compared caseload for index procedures 2017-2019 (period 1) versus 2020 (period 2) to see the effect of the COVID pandemic. We then compared the activity during the first lockdown (March 23rd) to the rest of the year when we increased our theatre access by utilising a 'clean' site.

RESULTS

The average annual number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed during period 1 was 82 and 352 respectively. This reduced to 68 (17.1% reduction) and 262 (25.6% reduction) during period 2. The number of patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy decreased from 308 to 243 (21% reduction). The number of prostate biopsies decreased from 420 to 234 (44.3% reduction). The number of radical orchidectomies decreased from 18 to 11 (39% reduction). The mean number of RARC and RARP per month during period 2 was 5.5 and 22. This decreased to 4 and 9 per month during the first national lockdown but was maintained thereafter despite two further lockdowns.

CONCLUSION

There has been a substantial decrease in urological oncology caseload during the COVID pandemic. The use of alternate pathways such as 'clean' sites can ensure continuity of care for cancer surgery and training needs.

Patterns of Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing and Prostate Biopsies During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

This study examined changes in prostate disease screening (prostatic-specific antigen [PSA] testing), prostate biopsy testing, and prostate cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic through December 2020.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This analysis included test results from men ≥ 40 years, without prior International Classification of Diseases-10 record of prostate cancer since January 2016, who received PSA or prostate biopsy testing at Quest Diagnostics during January 2018-December 2020. Monthly trends were evaluated for three periods: prepandemic (January 2018-February 2020), early-pandemic (March-May 2020), and late-pandemic (June-December 2020).

RESULTS

Meeting inclusion criteria were 16,365,833 PSA and 48,819 prostate biopsy results. The average monthly number of PSA tests declined from 465,187 prepandemic to 295,786 early-pandemic (36.4% decrease; P = .01) before rebounding to 483,374 (3.9% increase; P = .23) late-pandemic. The monthly average number of PSA results ≥ 50 ng/mL (23,356; 0.14% of all PSA results) dipped from 659 prepandemic to 506 early-pandemic (23.2% decrease; P = .02) and rebounded to 674 late-pandemic (2.3% increase; P = .65). The average monthly number of prostate biopsy results decreased from 1,453 prepandemic to 903 early-pandemic (37.9% decrease; P = .01) before rebounding to 1,190 late-pandemic (18.1% decrease; P = .01). The average monthly number for Gleason score ≥ 8 (6,241; 12.8% of all prostate biopsies) declined from 182 prepandemic to 130 early-pandemic (28.6% decrease; P = .02) and decreased to 161 late-pandemic (11.5% decrease; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that a substantial number of prostate screening opportunities and cancer diagnoses have been missed. Efforts are needed to bring such patients back for screening and diagnostic testing and to restore appropriate care for non-COVID-19-related medical conditions.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on uro-oncological disease outcomes at an Italian tertiary referral center

Purpose

To assess differences in referral and pathologic outcomes for uro-oncology cases prior to and during the COVID pandemic, comparing clinical and pathological data of cancer surgeries performed at an academic referral center between 2019 and 2020.

Methods

We collected data of 880 prostate biopsies, 393 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) for prostate cancer (PCa), 767 trans-urethral resections of bladder tumor (TURB) and 134 radical cystectomies (RC) for bladder cancer (BCa), 29 radical nephro-ureterectomies (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma, 130 partial nephrectomies (PN) and 12 radical nephrectomies (RN) for renal cancer, and 41 orchifunicolectomies for testicular cancer. Data of patients treated in 2019 (before COVID-19 pandemic) were compared to patients treated in 2020 (during pandemic).

Results

No significant decline in uro-oncological surgical activity was seen between 2019 and 2020. No significant increase in time between diagnosis and surgery was observed for all considered cancers. No differences in terms of main pathologic features were observed in patients undergoing RARP, TURB, RNU, RN/PN, or orchifunicolectomy. A higher proportion of ISUP grade 3 and 4 PCa were diagnosed in 2020 at biopsy (p = 0.001), but this did not translate into worse pathological grade/stage at RARP. In 2020, more advanced disease features were seen after RC, including lymph node involvement (p = 0.01) and non-organ confined disease (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Neither decline in uro-oncologic activity nor delay between diagnosis and treatment was observed at our institution during the first year of COVID-19 pandemic. No significant worsening of cancer disease features was found in 2020 except for muscle-invasive BCa.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03842-y.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Kidney Cancer Management

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still has a huge impact on the management of many chronic diseases such as cancer. Few data are presently available reagarding how the management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed due to this unprecedented situation. OBJECTIVE: To discuss the challenges and issues of the diagnosis and treatment of RCC in the COVID-19 era, and to provide recommendations based on the collected literature and our personal experience. METHODS: Systematic review of the available Literature regarding the management of RCC during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. RESULTS: Our review showed a prevalence of narrative publications, raising the issue of the real relevance of the evidence retrieved. Indeed, the only original data about RCC and COVID-19 found were a small retrospective case series and two surveys, providing either patients’ or physicians’ viewpoints. CONCLUSIONS: The expected delayed diagnosis of RCC could lead to an increase of advanced/metastatic cases; thus, proper therapeutic choices for patients with small renal masses should be carefully evaluated case by case, in order to avoid negative effects on long-term survival rates. The controversial interaction between immune checkpoint blockade and COVID-19 pathogenesis is more hypothetical than evidence-based, and thus immunotherapy should not be denied, whenever appropriate. To avoid treatments which won’t have an impact on patients’ survival, a honest and accurate evaluation of the cost/benefit ratio of each treatment option should be always performed. Finally, SARS-CoV-2 swab positivity should not prevent the continuation of ongoing active treatments in asymptomatic cases, or or after symptoms’ resolution.

Oncologic impact of delaying radical prostatectomy in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To summarize the available evidence on the survival and pathologic outcomes after deferred radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

The PubMed database and Web of Science were searched in November 2020 according to the PRISMA statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they reported the survival and pathologic outcomes of patients treated with deferred RP for intermediate- and high-risk PCa compared to the control group including those patients treated with RP without delay.

RESULTS

Overall, nineteen studies met our eligibility criteria. We found a significant heterogeneity across the studies in terms of definitions for delay and outcomes, as well as in patients' baseline clinicopathologic features. According to the currently available literature, deferred RP does not seem to affect oncological survival outcomes, such as prostate cancer-specific mortality and metastasis-free survival, in patients with intermediate- or high-risk PCa. However, the impact of deferred RP on biochemical recurrence rates remains controversial. There is no clear association of deferring RP with any of the features of aggressive disease such as pathologic upgrading, upstaging, positive surgical margins, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, and lymph node invasion. Deferred RP was not associated with the need for secondary treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to the different definitions of a delayed RP, it is hard to make a consensus regarding the safe delay time. However, the current data suggest that deferring RP in patients with intermediate- and high-risk PCa for at least around 3 months is generally safe, as it does not lead to adverse pathologic outcomes, biochemical recurrence, the need for secondary therapy, or worse oncological survival outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing urological elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national overview across 28 Italian institutions

Introduction

The aim of this study was to assess the safety of elective urological surgery performed during the pandemic by estimating the prevalence of COVID-19-like symptoms in the postoperative period and its correlation with perioperative and clinical factors.

Material and methods

In this multicenter, observational study we recorded clinical, surgical and postoperative data of consecutive patients undergoing elective urological surgery in 28 different institutions across Italy during initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (between February 24 and March 30, 2020, inclusive).

Results

A total of 1943 patients were enrolled. In 12%, 7.1%, 21.3%, 56.7% and 2.6% of cases an open, laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic or percutaneous surgical approach was performed, respectively. Overall, 166 (8.5%) postoperative complications were registered, 77 (3.9%) surgical and 89 (4.6%) medical. Twenty-eight (1.4%) patients were readmitted to hospital after discharge and 13 (0.7%) died. In the 30 days following discharge, fever and respiratory symptoms were recorded in 101 (5.2%) and 60 (3.1%) patients. At multivariable analysis, not performing nasopharyngeal swab at hospital admission (HR 2.3; CI 95% 1.01–5.19; p = 0.04) was independently associated with risk of developing postoperative medical complications. Number of patients in the facility was confirmed as an independent predictor of experiencing postoperative respiratory symptoms (p = 0.047, HR:1.12; CI95% 1.00–1.05), while COVID-19-free type of hospitalization facility was a strong independent protective factor (p = 0.02, HR:0.23, CI95% 0.07–0.79).

Conclusions

Performing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to affect perioperative outcomes as long as proper preventive measures are adopted, including nasopharyngeal swab before hospital admission and hospitalization in dedicated COVID-19-free facilities.