The Effect of Adverse Surgical Margins on the Risk of Biochemical Recurrence after Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Positive surgical margins (PSM) after radical prostatectomy are associated with a greater risk of biochemical recurrence (BCR). However, not all PSM harbour the same prognosis for recurrence. We aim to determine the impact of different PSM characteristics and their coexistence on the risk of BCR. This retrospective study included 333 patients that underwent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer between 2015-2020 at a single institution. The effect of PSM and their adverse characteristics on the risk of BCR was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Kaplan-Meier was used to represent BCR-free survival stratified by margin status. With a median follow-up of 34.5 months, patients with PSM had a higher incidence of BCR, higher risk of relapse and lower BCR-free survival than negative margins (p < 0.001). We established as adverse characteristics: PSM length ≥ 3 mm, multifocality and Gleason at margin > 3. PSM ≥ 3 mm or multifocal PSM were associated with an increased risk for BCR compared to favourable margins (HR 3.50; 95% CI 2.05-5.95, p < 0.001 and HR 2.18; 95% CI 1.09-4.37, p = 0.028, respectively). The coexistence of these two adverse features in the PSM also conferred a higher risk for biochemical relapse and lower BCR-free survival. Adverse Gleason in the margin did not confer a higher risk for BCR than non-adverse margins in our models. We concluded that PSM are an independent predictor for BCR and that the presence of adverse characteristics, such as length and focality, and their coexistence in the PSM are associated with a greater risk of recurrence. Nevertheless, subclassifying PSM with adverse features did not enhance the model's predictive performance in our cohort

Improving Guideline Adherence in Urology

CONTEXT: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) distil an evidence base into recommendations. CPG adherence is associated with better patient outcomes. However, preparation and dissemination of CPGs are a costly task involving multiple skilled personnel. Furthermore, dissemination alone does not ensure CPG adherence. Reasons for nonadherence are often complex, but understanding practice variations and reasons for nonadherence is key to improving CPG adherence and harmonising clinically appropriate and cost-effective care. OBJECTIVE: To overview approaches to improving guideline adherence, to provide urology-specific examples of knowledge-practice gaps, and to highlight potential solutions informed by implementation science. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Three common approaches to implementation science (the Knowledge-To-Action framework, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and the Behaviour Change Wheel), are summarised. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Three implementation problems in urology are illustrated: underuse of single instillation of intravesical chemotherapy in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, overuse of androgen deprivation therapy in localised prostate cancer, and guideline-discordant imaging in prostate cancer. Research using implementation science approaches to address these implementation problems is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Urologists, patients, health care providers, funders, and other key stakeholders must commit to reliably capturing and reporting data on patient outcomes, practice variations, guideline adherence, and the impact of adherence on outcomes. Leverage of implementation science frameworks is a sound next step towards improving guideline adherence and the associated benefits of evidence-based care. PATIENT SUMMARY: Clinical practice guideline documents are created by expert panels. These documents provide overviews of the evidence for the tests and treatments used in patient care. They also provide recommendations and it is expected that in most circumstances clinicians will follow these recommendations. Sometimes, health care professionals cannot or do not follow these recommendations and it is not always clear why. In this review article we look at some examples of research approaches to addressing this problem of nonadherence and we provide some examples specific to urology

Transcriptional Profile Associated with Clinical Outcomes in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treated with Androgen Deprivation and Docetaxel

(1) Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel (DX) combination is a standard therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) patients. (2) Methods: We investigate if tumor transcriptomic analysis predicts mHSPC evolution in a multicenter retrospective biomarker study. A customized panel of 184 genes was tested in mRNA from tumor samples by the nCounter platform in 125 mHSPC patients treated with ADT+DX. Gene expression was correlated with castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CRPC-FS) and overall survival (OS). (3) Results: High expression of androgen receptor (AR) signature was independently associated with longer CRPC-FS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3-0.9; p = 0.015), high expression of estrogen receptor (ESR) signature with longer CRPC-FS (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9; p = 0.019) and OS (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, p = 0.024), and lower expression of tumor suppressor genes (TSG) (RB1, PTEN and TP53) with shorter OS (HR 2, 95% CI 1-3.8; p = 0.044). ARV7 expression was independently associated with shorter CRPC-FS (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1, p = 0.008) and OS (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.6, p = 0.004), high ESR2 was associated with longer OS (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-1, p = 0.048) and low expression of RB1 was independently associated with shorter OS (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2, p = 0.014). (4) Conclusions: AR, ESR, and TSG expression signatures, as well as ARV7, RB1, and ESR2 expression, have a prognostic value in mHSPC patients treated with ADT+DX