32 research outputs found

    Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for residual masses after chemotherapy in nonseminomatous germ cell testicular tumor

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection has been advocated for the management of post-chemotherapy (PC-RPLND) residual masses of non-seminomatous germ cell tumors of the testis (NSGCT). There remains some debate as to the clinical benefit and associated morbidity. Our objective was to report our experience with PC-RPLND in NSGCT.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We have reviewed the clinical, pathologic and surgical parameters associated with PC-RPLND in a single institution. Between 1994 and 2008, three surgeons operated 73 patients with residual masses after cisplatin-based chemotherapy for a metastatic testicular cancer. Patients needed to have normal postchemotherapy serum tumor markers, no prior surgical attempts to resect retroperitoneal masses and resectable retroperitoneal tumor mass at surgery to be included in this analysis</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean age was 30.4 years old. Fifty-three percent had mixed germ cell tumors. The mean size of retroperitoneal metastasis was 6.3 and 4.0 cm, before and post-chemotherapy, respectively. In 56% of patients, the surgeon was able to perform a nerve sparing procedure. The overall complication rate was 27.4% and no patient died due to surgical complications. The pathologic review showed presence of fibrosis/necrosis, teratoma and viable tumor (non-teratoma) in 27 (37.0%), 30 (41.1%) and 16 (21.9%) patients, respectively. The subgroups presenting fibrosis and large tumors were more likely to have a surgical complication and had less nerve sparing procedures.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>PC-RPLND is a relatively safe procedure. The presence of fibrosis and large residual masses are associated with surgical complications and non-nerve-sparing procedure.</p

    Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Population-Based Nested Case-Control Study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Despite strong laboratory evidence that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) could prevent prostate cancer, epidemiological studies have so far reported conflicting results. Most studies were limited by lack of information on dosage and duration of use of the different classes of NSAIDs. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study using data from Saskatchewan Prescription Drug Plan (SPDP) and Cancer Registry to examine the effects of dose and duration of use of five classes of NSAIDs on prostate cancer risk. Cases (N = 9,007) were men aged ≥40 years diagnosed with prostatic carcinoma between 1985 and 2000, and were matched to four controls on age and duration of SPDP membership. Detailed histories of exposure to prescription NSAIDs and other drugs were obtained from the SPDP. RESULTS: Any use of propionates (e.g., ibuprofen, naproxen) was associated with a modest reduction in prostate cancer risk (Odds ratio = 0.90; 95%CI 0.84-0.95), whereas use of other NSAIDs was not. In particular, we did not observe the hypothesized inverse association with aspirin use (1.01; 0.95-1.07). There was no clear evidence of dose-response or duration-response relationships for any of the examined NSAID classes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest modest benefits of at least some NSAIDs in reducing prostate cancer risk

    Utilization Trends of Novel Hormonal Agents in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Quebec

    No full text
    Background: The introduction of novel hormonal agents (NHAs) such as abiraterone acetate (ABI) and enzalutamide (ENZ) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) was an important milestone given their survival benefits, tolerability, and ease of administration relative to taxane chemotherapies. This descriptive study sought to describe the utilization trends of ABI and ENZ in patients with mCRPC in the early years after their approval in the province of Quebec in Canada. Methods: A retrospective population-based cohort was extracted from Quebec public healthcare administrative databases. The cohort included first-time users of NHAs (ABI or ENZ) from 2011 to 2016. The primary analyses aimed to describe the overall temporal trends (2011&ndash;2016) of NHA initiators by chemotherapy status (chemotherapy-na&iuml;ve versus post-chemotherapy), and prescribing specialty (medical oncology versus urology versus others). Results: The cohort comprised 2183 patients, with 1562 (72%) in the chemotherapy-na&iuml;ve group and 621 (28%) in the post-chemotherapy group. While the majority of patients were post-chemotherapy NHA initiators in 2012, this proportion decreased over time and accounted for only 13% of NHA initiators by the end of 2016. Medical oncologists were the most frequent prescribers of NHAs (upwards of 60%) throughout 2012 but fell to 45% by the end of 2016. Conversely, the proportion of prescriptions by urologists increased from 22% in 2012 to 42% in 2016. Conclusion: Over time, there was an increasing proportion of (1) patients who initiated NHAs without prior chemotherapy treatment, (2) NHA prescribing by urologists, and (3) ENZ users. Taken together, this implies that the introduction of NHAs has altered the management of mCRPC and urologists quickly adopted NHAs into their practice

    The Health Economics of Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive and Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer—A Systematic Literature Review with Application to the Canadian Context

    No full text
    Background: Health economic evaluations are needed to assess the impact on the healthcare system of emerging treatment patterns for advanced prostate cancer. The objective of this study is to review the scientific literature identifying cost-effectiveness and cost analyses that are assessing treatments for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Methods: On 29 June 2021, we searched the scientific (MEDLINE, Embase, and EBSCO) and grey literature for health economic studies targeting mHSPC and nmCRPC. We used the CHEC-extended checklist and the Welte checklist for risk-of-bias assessment and transferability analysis, respectively. Results: We retained 20 cost-effectiveness and 4 cost analyses in the mHSPC setting, and 14 cost-effectiveness and 6 cost analyses in the nmCRPC setting. Docetaxel in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was the most cost-effective treatment in the mHSPC setting. Apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide presented similar results vs. ADT alone and were identified as cost-effective treatments for nmCRPC. An increase in costs as patients transitioned from nmCRPC to mCRPC was noted. Conclusions: We concluded that there is an important unmet need for health economic evaluations in the mHSPC and nmCRPC setting incorporating real-world data to support healthcare decision making
    corecore