Robotic partial nephrectomy for posterior tumors through a retroperitoneal approach offers decreased length of stay compared with the transperitoneal approach: A propensity-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION: We sought to compare surgical outcomes between transperitoneal and retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) for posterior tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using our multi-institutional RPN database, we reviewed 610 consecutive cases for posterior renal masses treated between 2007 and 2015. Primary outcomes were complications, operative time, length of stay (LOS), surgical margin status, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) preservation. Secondary outcomes were estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time (WIT), disease recurrence, and disease-specific mortality. Due to significant differences in treatment year and tumor size between approaches, retroperitoneal cases were matched 1:4 to transperitoneal cases based on propensity scores using the greedy algorithm. Outcomes were compared between approaches using the chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: After matching, 296 transperitoneal and 74 retroperitoneal cases were available for analysis, and matched groups were well balanced in terms of treatment year, age, gender, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification (ASA) score, body mass index, tumor laterality, tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. (radius, exophytic/endophytic properties, nearness of tumor to the collecting system or sinus, anterior/posterior, location relative to polar lines) score, and hilar location. Compared with transperitoneal, the retroperitoneal approach was associated with significantly shorter mean LOS (2.2 vs 2.6 days, p = 0.01), but longer mean WIT (21 vs 19 minutes, p = 0.01). Intraoperative (p = 0.35) and postoperative complications (p = 0.65), operative time (p = 0.93), positive margins (p = 1.0), and latest eGFR preservation (p = 0.25) were not significantly different between approaches. No differences were detected in the other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-volume surgeons, transperitoneal and retroperitoneal RPN achieved similar outcomes for posterior renal masses, although with slight differences in LOS and WIT. Retroperitoneal RPN may be an effective option for the treatment of certain small posterior renal masses

Multicenter Experience with Nonischemic Multiport Laparoscopic and Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Partial Nephrectomy Utilizing Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation Coagulator

Objective. To investigate feasibility of multiport and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) nonischemic laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (NI-LPN) utilizing bipolar radiofrequency coagulator. Methods. Multicenter retrospective review of 60 patients (46 multiport/14 LESS) undergoing NI-LPN between 4/2006 and 9/2009. Multiport and LESS NI-LPN utilized Habib 4X bipolar radiofrequency coagulator to form a hemostatic zone followed by nonischemic tumor excision and renorrhaphy. Demographics, tumor/perioperative characteristics, and outcomes were analyzed. Results. 59/60 (98.3%) successfully underwent NI-LPN. Mean tumor size was 2.35 cm. Mean operative time was 160.0 minutes. Mean estimated blood loss was 131.4 mL. Preoperative/postoperative creatinine (mg/dL) was 1.02/1.07 (P = .471). All had negative margins. 12 (20%) patients developed complications. 3 (5%) developed urine leaks. No differences between multiport and LESS-PN were noted as regards demographics, tumor size, outcomes, and complications. Conclusion. Initial experience demonstrates that nonischemic multiport and LESS-PN is safe and efficacious, with excellent short-term preservation of renal function. Long-term data are needed to confirm oncological efficacy

T-Cell Infiltration and Adaptive Treg Resistance in Response to Androgen Deprivation With or Without Vaccination in Localized Prostate Cancer

Purpose: Previous studies suggest that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) promotes antitumor immunity in prostate cancer. Whether a vaccine-based approach can augment this effect remains unknown. Experimental Design: Therefore, we conducted a neoadjuvant, randomized study to quantify the immunologic effects of a granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-secreting allogeneic cellular vaccine in combination with low-dose cyclophosphamide (Cy/GVAX) followed by degarelix versus degarelix alone in patients with high-risk localized prostate adenocarcinoma who were planned for radical prostatectomy. Results: Both Cy/GVAX plus degarelix and degarelix alone led to significant increases in intratumoral CD8+ T cell infiltration and PD-L1 expression as compared to a cohort of untreated, matched controls. However, the CD8+ T cell infiltrate was accompanied by a proportional increase in regulatory T cells (Treg), suggesting that adaptive Treg resistance may dampen the immunogenicity of ADT. Although Cy/GVAX followed by degarelix was associated with a modest improvement in time-to-PSA progression and time-to-next treatment as well as an increase in PD-L1, there was no difference in the CD8 T-cell infiltrate as compared to degarelix alone. Gene expression profiling demonstrated that CHIT1, a macrophage marker, was differentially upregulated with Cy/GVAX plus degarelix compared to degarelix alone. Conclusions: Our results highlight that ADT with or without Cy/GVAX induces a complex immune response within the prostate tumor microenvironment. These data have important implications for combining ADT with immunotherapy. In particular, our finding that ADT increases both CD8+ T cells and Tregs, supports the development of regimens combining ADT with Treg-depleting agents in the treatment of prostate cancer

Protocol of a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial Assessing Transperineal Prostate Biopsy to Reduce Infectiouscomplications

Introduction Approximately one million prostate biopsies are performed annually in the USA, and most are performed using a transrectal approach under local anaesthesia. The risk of postbiopsy infection is increasing due to increasing antibiotic resistance of rectal flora. Single-centre studies suggest that a clean, percutaneous transperineal approach to prostate biopsy may have a lower risk of infection. To date, there is no high-level evidence comparing transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy. We hypothesise that transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia has a significantly lower risk of infection, similar pain/discomfort levels and comparable detection of non-low-grade prostate cancer. Methods and analysis We will perform a multicentre, prospective randomised clinical trial to compare transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy for elevated prostate-specific antigen in the first biopsy, prior negative biopsy and active surveillance biopsy setting. Prostate MRI will be performed prior to biopsy, and targeted biopsy will be conducted for suspicious MRI lesions in addition to systematic biopsy (12 cores). Approximately 1700 men will be recruited and randomised in a 1:1 ratio to transperineal versus transrectal biopsy. A streamlined design to collect data and to determine trial eligibility along with the two-stage consent process will be used to facilitate subject recruitment and retention. The primary outcome is postbiopsy infection, and secondary outcomes include other adverse events (bleeding, urinary retention), pain/ discomfort/anxiety and critically, detection of non-low-grade (grade group ≥2) prostate cancer. Ethics and dissemination The Institutional Review Board of the Biomedical Research Alliance of New York approved the research protocol (protocol number #18-02-365, approved 20 April 2020). The results of the trial will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed medical journals. Trial registration number NCT04815876