Understanding of prognosis in non-metastatic prostate cancer: a randomised comparative study of clinician estimates measured against the PREDICT prostate prognostic model

Abstract: PREDICT Prostate is an individualised prognostic model that provides long-term survival estimates for men diagnosed with non-metastatic prostate cancer (www.prostate.predict.nhs.uk). In this study clinician estimates of survival were compared against model predictions and its potential value as a clinical tool was assessed. Prostate cancer (PCa) specialists were invited to participate in the study. 190 clinicians (63% urologists, 17% oncologists, 20% other) were randomised into two groups and shown 12 clinical vignettes through an online portal. Each group viewed opposing vignettes with clinical information alone, or alongside PREDICT Prostate estimates. 15-year clinician survival estimates were compared against model predictions and reported treatment recommendations with and without seeing PREDICT estimates were compared. 155 respondents (81.6%) reported counselling new PCa patients at least weekly. Clinician estimates of PCa-specific mortality exceeded PREDICT estimates in 10/12 vignettes. Their estimates for treatment survival benefit at 15 years were over-optimistic in every vignette, with mean clinician estimates more than 5-fold higher than PREDICT Prostate estimates. Concomitantly seeing PREDICT Prostate estimates led to significantly lower reported likelihoods of recommending radical treatment in 7/12 (58%) vignettes, particularly in older patients. These data suggest clinicians overestimate cancer-related mortality and radical treatment benefit. Using an individualised prognostic tool may help reduce overtreatment

Models predicting survival to guide treatment decision-making in newly diagnosed primary non-metastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Men diagnosed with non-metastatic prostate cancer require standardised and robust long-term prognostic information to help them decide on management. Most currently-used tools use short-term and surrogate outcomes. We explored the evidence base in the literature on available pre-treatment, prognostic models built around long-term survival and assess the accuracy, generalisability and clinical availability of these models. DESIGN: Systematic literature review, pre-specified and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018086394). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 through February 2018, using previously-tested search terms. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Inclusion required a multivariable model prognostic model for non-metastatic prostate cancer, using long-term survival data (defined as ≥5 years), which was not treatment-specific and usable at the point of diagnosis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Title, abstract and full-text screening were sequentially performed by three reviewers. Data extraction was performed for items in the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies checklist. Individual studies were assessed using the new Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool. RESULTS: Database searches yielded 6581 studies after deduplication. Twelve studies were included in the final review. Nine were model development studies using data from over 231 888 men. However, only six of the nine studies included any conservatively managed cases and only three of the nine included treatment as a predictor variable. Every included study had at least one parameter for which there was high risk of bias, with failure to report accuracy, and inadequate reporting of missing data common failings. Three external validation studies were included, reporting two available models: The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment score and the Cambridge Prognostic Groups. Neither included treatment effect, and both had potential flaws in design, but represent the most robust and usable prognostic models currently available. CONCLUSION: Few long-term prognostic models exist to inform decision-making at diagnosis of non-metastatic prostate cancer. Improved models are required to inform management and avoid undertreatment and overtreatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer.The Urology Foundation - Research Scholarship

General practitioner perception of prostate-specific antigen testing has improved, but more awareness of prostate cancer risk in younger patients is still awaited.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, a county-wide survey of general practitioners (GPs) in the United Kingdom (UK) identified a reluctance to refer younger men with abnormal prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels. Younger men have the most to gain from early-detection of prostate cancer (PCa), which remains a national government priority in the UK and around the world. We sought to assess changes in perception of abnormal PSA-values amongst UK GPs over the past 10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 500 self-administered paper questionnaires were distributed to individually named GPs. One hundred and forty two responded (28.4%), representing a patient population of ∼600,000. A series of visual analogue questions assessed referral thresholds and understanding of risk factors related to the development of PCa. RESULTS: GPs with a median of 23-years experience responded. Although mean PSA threshold for referral to urology did fall between 2006 and 2016 in both the 45-year (5.42 ng/mL vs. 4.61 ng/mL P = 0.0003) and 55-year (5.81 ng/mL vs. 5.30 ng/mL P = 0.0164) age groups, the median referral values were unchanged. Significantly, referral thresholds quoted for younger men (<65 years) were considerably higher than recommended UK maximum PSA-levels. Using case-based scenarios, practitioners appeared more likely to refer older men with abnormal PSA values, with GPs reporting an average 56.2% likelihood of referring an asymptomatic 55-year-old with elevated age-adjusted PSA of 4.6 ng/mL. A total of 95.1% recognised a family history of PCa to be a potential risk factor but other at-risk categories were not so clearly understood. CONCLUSION: Awareness of abnormal PSA values in UK primary care is improving, but continues to lag behind the evidence. Strategies to disseminate knowledge of maximum PSA-values to GPs should focus especially on those for younger patients

Individual prognosis at diagnosis in nonmetastatic prostate cancer: Development and external validation of the PREDICT Prostate multivariable model.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic stratification is the cornerstone of management in nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa). However, existing prognostic models are inadequate-often using treatment outcomes rather than survival, stratifying by broad heterogeneous groups and using heavily treated cohorts. To address this unmet need, we developed an individualised prognostic model that contextualises PCa-specific mortality (PCSM) against other cause mortality, and estimates the impact of treatment on survival. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using records from the United Kingdom National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), data were collated for 10,089 men diagnosed with nonmetastatic PCa between 2000 and 2010 in Eastern England. Median follow-up was 9.8 years with 3,829 deaths (1,202 PCa specific). Totals of 19.8%, 14.1%, 34.6%, and 31.5% of men underwent conservative management, prostatectomy, radiotherapy (RT), and androgen deprivation monotherapy, respectively. A total of 2,546 men diagnosed in Singapore over a similar time period represented an external validation cohort. Data were randomly split 70:30 into model development and validation cohorts. Fifteen-year PCSM and non-PCa mortality (NPCM) were explored using separate multivariable Cox models within a competing risks framework. Fractional polynomials (FPs) were utilised to fit continuous variables and baseline hazards. Model accuracy was assessed by discrimination and calibration using the Harrell C-index and chi-squared goodness of fit, respectively, within both validation cohorts. A multivariable model estimating individualised 10- and 15-year survival outcomes was constructed combining age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), histological grade, biopsy core involvement, stage, and primary treatment, which were each independent prognostic factors for PCSM, and age and comorbidity, which were prognostic for NPCM. The model demonstrated good discrimination, with a C-index of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.80-0.87) for 15-year PCSM in the UK and Singapore validation cohorts, respectively, comparing favourably to international risk-stratification criteria. Discrimination was maintained for overall mortality, with C-index 0.77 (95% CI: 0.75-0.78) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.73-0.78). The model was well calibrated with no significant difference between predicted and observed PCa-specific (p = 0.19) or overall deaths (p = 0.43) in the UK cohort. Key study limitations were a relatively small external validation cohort, an inability to account for delayed changes to treatment beyond 12 months, and an absence of tumour-stage subclassifications. CONCLUSIONS: 'PREDICT Prostate' is an individualised multivariable PCa prognostic model built from baseline diagnostic information and the first to our knowledge that models potential treatment benefits on overall survival. Prognostic power is high despite using only routinely collected clinicopathological information.The Urology Foundatio

Synthetic cannabinoid availability on darknet drug markets—changes during 2016–2017

open access articleChanges in legislation have affected supply routes of new psychoactive substances such as synthetic cannabinoids with evidence of supply over the darknet. We identified darknet drug markets using an index database and Tor Browser to access markets. We identified SC in product listings using a custom-programmed script. We collected data at bimonthly intervals (August 2016–April 2017). Eleven darknet markets listed SC for sale, the largest number from China, UK, US, Netherlands, and Germany. Formulations available were high purity powder/crystal, smoking preparations and vape preparations. The top five listed compounds from China across the time points were FUB-AMB, ABD-FUBINACA, 5F-NPB-22, MAB-CHMINACA, and NM-2201. 5F-CUMYL-4CN-PINACA was unavailable at early time points but emerged during the study. Cost of high purity formulations from China ranged from 1.3 to 3.1 Euro per gram for quantities ≥1000 g. Europe and North America accounted for 99% smoking preparations predominantly in small packages (<50 g). SC are widely available on the darknet with availability changing over time. High purity formulations are predominantly available from China in quantities up to kilograms with price per gram reducing with increased quantity. Small packages of ready-made smoking mixtures are available from Europe and North America

Comparative performance and external validation of the multivariable PREDICT Prostate tool for non-metastatic prostate cancer: a study in 69,206 men from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe)

Abstract: Background: PREDICT Prostate is an endorsed prognostic model that provides individualised long-term prostate cancer-specific and overall survival estimates. The model, derived from UK data, estimates potential treatment benefit on overall survival. In this study, we externally validated the model in a large independent dataset and compared performance to existing models and within treatment groups. Methods: Men with non-metastatic prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 100 ng/ml diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 in the nationwide population-based Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) were included. Data on age, PSA, clinical stage, grade group, biopsy involvement, primary treatment and comorbidity were retrieved. Sixty-nine thousand two hundred six men were included with 13.9 years of median follow-up. Fifteen-year survival estimates were calculated using PREDICT Prostate for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Discrimination was assessed using Harrell’s concordance (c)-index in R. Calibration was evaluated using cumulative available follow-up in Stata (TX, USA). Results: Overall discrimination of PREDICT Prostate was good with c-indices of 0.85 (95% CI 0.85–0.86) for PCSM and 0.79 (95% CI 0.79–0.80) for ACM. Overall calibration of the model was excellent with 25,925 deaths predicted and 25,849 deaths observed. Within the conservative management and radical treatment groups, c-indices for 15-year PCSM were 0.81 and 0.78, respectively. Calibration also remained good within treatment groups. The discrimination of PREDICT Prostate significantly outperformed the EAU, NCCN and CAPRA scores for both PCSM and ACM within this cohort overall. A key limitation is the use of retrospective cohort data. Conclusions: This large external validation demonstrates that PREDICT Prostate is a robust and generalisable model to aid clinical decision-making

Comparative performance and external validation of the multivariable PREDICT Prostate tool for non-metastatic prostate cancer: a study in 69,206 men from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe)

Abstract: Background: PREDICT Prostate is an endorsed prognostic model that provides individualised long-term prostate cancer-specific and overall survival estimates. The model, derived from UK data, estimates potential treatment benefit on overall survival. In this study, we externally validated the model in a large independent dataset and compared performance to existing models and within treatment groups. Methods: Men with non-metastatic prostate cancer and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < 100 ng/ml diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 in the nationwide population-based Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) were included. Data on age, PSA, clinical stage, grade group, biopsy involvement, primary treatment and comorbidity were retrieved. Sixty-nine thousand two hundred six men were included with 13.9 years of median follow-up. Fifteen-year survival estimates were calculated using PREDICT Prostate for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Discrimination was assessed using Harrell’s concordance (c)-index in R. Calibration was evaluated using cumulative available follow-up in Stata (TX, USA). Results: Overall discrimination of PREDICT Prostate was good with c-indices of 0.85 (95% CI 0.85–0.86) for PCSM and 0.79 (95% CI 0.79–0.80) for ACM. Overall calibration of the model was excellent with 25,925 deaths predicted and 25,849 deaths observed. Within the conservative management and radical treatment groups, c-indices for 15-year PCSM were 0.81 and 0.78, respectively. Calibration also remained good within treatment groups. The discrimination of PREDICT Prostate significantly outperformed the EAU, NCCN and CAPRA scores for both PCSM and ACM within this cohort overall. A key limitation is the use of retrospective cohort data. Conclusions: This large external validation demonstrates that PREDICT Prostate is a robust and generalisable model to aid clinical decision-making

Evolution and oncological outcomes of a contemporary radical prostatectomy practice in a UK regional tertiary referral centre

Objective To investigate the clinical and pathological trends over a ten-year period for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) in a UK regional tertiary referral centre. Patients and Methods 1500 consecutive patients underwent RALP between October 2005 and January 2015. Prospective data was collected on clinic-pathological details at presentation as well as surgical outcomes and compared over time. Results The median(range) age of patients throughout the period was 62(35-78) years. The proportion of pre-operative high-grade cases (Gleason sum 8-10) rose from 4.6% in 2005-2008 to 18.2% in 2013-2015 (p<0.0001). In the same periods the proportion of clinical stage T3 cases operated on rose from 2.4% to 11.4% (p<0.0001). Median PSA at diagnosis did not alter significantly. Overall 11.6% of men in 2005-2008 were classified pre-operatively as high-risk by NICE criteria, compared to 33.6% in 2013-2015 (p<0.0001). The corresponding proportions for low-risk cases were 48.6% and 17.3% respectively. Final surgical pathology demonstrated an increase in tumour stage, Gleason grade and nodal status across time. The proportion of pT3 cases rose from 43.2% in 2005-2008 to 55.5% in 2013-15 (p=0.0007), Gleason grade 9-10 tumours increased from 1.8% to 9.1% (p=0.0002) and positive nodal status increased from 1.6% to 12.9% (p<0.0001) between the same periods. Despite this, positive surgical margin rates showed a downward trend in all pT groups across the different eras (p=0.72). Conclusion This study suggests that the patient profile for RALP in our unit is changing, with increasing proportions of higher-stage and more advanced disease being referred and operated on. Surgical margin outcomes however have remained good.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.1351

Orchidopexy for Testicular Torsion : A Systematic Review of Surgical Technique

Peer reviewedPostprin

Evolution and oncological outcomes of a contemporary radical prostatectomy practice in a UK regional tertiary referral centre.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical and pathological trends, over a 10-year period, in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) in a UK regional tertiary referral centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 1 500 consecutive patients underwent RALP between October 2005 and January 2015. Prospective data were collected on clinicopathological details at presentation as well as surgical outcomes and compared over time. RESULTS: The median (range) age of patients throughout the period was 62 (35-78) years. The proportion of preoperative high-grade cases (Gleason score 8-10) rose from 4.6% in 2005-2008 to 18.2% in 2013-2015 (P < 0.001). In the same periods the proportion of clinical stage T3 cases operated on rose from 2.4% to 11.4% (P < 0.001). The median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at diagnosis did not alter significantly. Overall, 11.6% of men in 2005-2008 were classified preoperatively as high-risk by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria, compared with 33.6% in 2013-2015 (P < 0.001). The corresponding proportions for low-risk cases were 48.6% and 17.3%, respectively. Final surgical pathology showed an increase in tumour stage, Gleason grade, and nodal status over time. The proportion of pT3 cases rose from 43.2% in 2005-2008 to 55.5% in 2013-2015 (P < 0.001), Gleason score 9-10 tumours increased from 1.8% to 9.1% (P < 0.001) and positive nodal status increased from 1.6% to 12.9% (P < 0.001) between the same periods. Despite this, positive surgical margin rates showed a downward trend in all pT groups across the different eras (P = 0.72). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the patient profile for RALP in our unit is changing, with increasing proportions of higher stage and more advanced disease being referred and operated on. However, surgical margin outcomes have remained good.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.1351