Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Disease Despite Weekly Preemptive CMV Strategy for Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

BACKGROUND: Transplant recipients presenting with cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia pose a challenge to a preemptive CMV management strategy. However, the rate and risk factors of such failure remain uncertain. METHODS: Solid organ transplantation (SOT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients with a first episode of CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNAemia within the first year posttransplantation were evaluated (n = 335). Patient records were reviewed for presence of CMV disease at the time of CMV DNAemia diagnosis. The distribution and prevalence of CMV disease were estimated, and the odds ratio (OR) of CMV disease was modeled using logistic regression. RESULTS: The prevalence of CMV disease increased for both SOT and HSCT with increasing diagnostic CMV PCR load and with screening intervals >14 days. The only independent risk factor in multivariate analysis was increasing CMV DNAemia load of the diagnostic CMV PCR (OR = 6.16; 95% confidence interval, 2.09–18.11). Among recipients receiving weekly screening (n = 147), 16 (10.8%) had CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia (median DNAemia load 628 IU/mL; interquartile range, 432–1274); 93.8% of these cases were HSCT and lung transplant recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite application of weekly screening intervals, HSCT and lung transplant recipients in particular presented with CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia. Additional research to improve the management of patients at risk of presenting with CMV disease at low levels of CMV DNAemia and despite weekly screening is warranted

Prostate-specific antigen testing accuracy in community practice

BACKGROUND: Most data on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing come from urologic cohorts comprised of volunteers for screening programs. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of PSA testing for detecting prostate cancer in community practice. METHODS: PSA testing results were compared with a reference standard of prostate biopsy. Subjects were 2,620 men 40 years and older undergoing (PSA) testing and biopsy from 1/1/95 through 12/31/98 in the Albuquerque, New Mexico metropolitan area. Diagnostic measures included the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios. RESULTS: Cancer was detected in 930 subjects (35%). The area under the ROC curve was 0.67 and the PSA cutpoint of 4 ng/ml had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 33%. The likelihood ratio for a positive test (LR+) was 1.28 and 0.42 for a negative test (LR-). PSA testing was most sensitive (90%) but least specific (27%) in older men. Age-specific reference ranges improved specificity in older men (49%) but decreased sensitivity (70%), with an LR+ of 1.38. Lowering the PSA cutpoint to 2 ng/ml resulted in a sensitivity of 95%, a specificity of 20%, and an LR+ of 1.19. CONCLUSIONS: PSA testing had fair discriminating power for detecting prostate cancer in community practice. The PSA cutpoint of 4 ng/ml was sensitive but relatively non-specific and associated likelihood ratios only moderately revised probabilities for cancer. Using age-specific reference ranges and a PSA cutpoint below 4 ng/ml improved test specificity and sensitivity, respectively, but did not improve the overall accuracy of PSA testing

Single institution followed by national implementation of systematic surgical quality control and feedback for radical prostatectomy : a 20-year journey

Purpose: The demand for objective and outcome-based facts about surgical results after radical prostatectomy (RP) is increasing. Systematic feedback is also essential for each surgeon to improve his/her performance. Methods: RP outcome data (e.g., pT-stage and margin status) have been registered at Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SUH) since 1988 and patient-related outcome measures (PROM) have been registered since 2001. The National Prostate Cancer Registry (NPCR) has covered all Regions in Sweden since 1998 and includes PROM-data from 2008. Initially PROM was on-paper questionnaires but due since 2018 all PROMs are collected electronically. In 2014 an on-line “dashboard” panel was introduced, showing the results for ten quality-control variables in real-time. Since 2017 all RP data on hospital, regional, and national levels are publicly accessible on-line on “www.npcr.se/RATTEN”. Results: The early PROM-data from SUH have been used for internal quality control. As national clinical and PROM-data from the NPCR have been made accessible on-line and in real-time we have incorporated this into our pre-existing protocol. Our data are now internally available as real-time NPCR reports on the individual surgeons’ results, as well as ePROM data. We can compare the results of each surgeon internally and to other departments’ aggregated data. The public can access data and compare hospital level data on “RATTEN”. Conclusions: The process of quality control of RP locally at SUH, and nationally through the NPCR, has been long but fruitful. The online design, with direct real-time feedback to the institutions that report the data, is essential