Androgen deprivation for prostate cancer

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/92046/1/26624_ftp.pd

Reimbursement cuts and changes in urologist use of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Abstract Background We examined the impact of urologist academic affiliation on use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer before and after major reimbursement cuts for ADT in hopes of better understanding the influence of financial incentives on its use. In particular, we hypothesized that if financial incentive was the predominant factor driving use, we should see a narrowing in the previously documented gap of ADT use between non-academic and academic urologists following the reimbursement cuts. Methods With the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End-Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database we examined use of ADT for potentially inappropriate indications (primary therapy of localized, lower risk tumors) among patients of 2214 urologists over the period 2000–2002 and 2004–2007, representing eras before and after reimbursement cuts. Multi-level logistic regression models were used to estimate the likelihood of ADT use adjusted for patient, tumor and urologist characteristics (academic affiliation, board certification, years in practice and patient panel size). Results Overall, ADT use peaked in 2002 at 46.6% of patients, but dropped dramatically in 2005, with a slow continued decrease through 2007 to 31.1%. A similar pattern was evident within most strata of urologist characteristics, including academic affiliation. In the multilevel model, patients of non-academic urologists had a 30% higher odds of receiving ADT than those of academic urologists in both the eras before and after the reimbursement cuts. Conclusion A similar proportionate drop in use of ADT among both academic and non-academic urologists following reimbursement cuts suggests that factors other than financial incentives may have played a role.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/110976/1/12894_2015_Article_20.pd

Risk of colorectal cancer in men on long-term androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Background Androgen deprivation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists or orchiectomy is a common but controversial treatment for prostate cancer. Uncertainties remain about its use, particularly with increasing recognition of serious side effects. In animal studies, androgens protect against colonic carcinogenesis, suggesting that androgen deprivation may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Methods We identified 107 859 men in the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database who were diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1993 through 2002, with follow-up available through 2004. The primary outcome was development of colorectal cancer, determined from SEER files on second primary cancers. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the influence of androgen deprivation on the outcome, adjusted for patient and prostate cancer characteristics. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Men who had orchiectomies had the highest unadjusted incidence rate of colorectal cancer (6.3 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.3 to 7.5), followed by men who had GnRH agonist therapy (4.4 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI = 4.0 to 4.9), and men who had no androgen deprivation (3.7 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI = 3.5 to 3.9). After adjustment for patient and prostate cancer characteristics, there was a statistically significant dose-response effect (P(trend) = .010) with an increasing risk of colorectal cancer associated with increasing duration of androgen deprivation. Compared with the absence of these treatments, there was an increased risk of colorectal cancer associated with use of GnRH agonist therapy for 25 months or longer (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.53) or with orchiectomy (HR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.14 to 1.66). Conclusion Long-term androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer

Stereo Imaging Miniature Endoscope

Stereo imaging requires two different perspectives of the same object and, traditionally, a pair of side-by-side cameras would be used but are not feasible for something as tiny as a less than 4-mm-diameter endoscope that could be used for minimally invasive surgeries or geoexploration through tiny fissures or bores. The proposed solution here is to employ a single lens, and a pair of conjugated, multiple-bandpass filters (CMBFs) to separate stereo images. When a CMBF is placed in front of each of the stereo channels, only one wavelength of the visible spectrum that falls within the passbands of the CMBF is transmitted through at a time when illuminated. Because the passbands are conjugated, only one of the two channels will see a particular wavelength. These time-multiplexed images are then mixed and reconstructed to display as stereo images. The basic principle of stereo imaging involves an object that is illuminated at specific wavelengths, and a range of illumination wavelengths is time multiplexed. The light reflected from the object selectively passes through one of the two CMBFs integrated with two pupils separated by a baseline distance, and is focused onto the imaging plane through an objective lens. The passband range of CMBFs and the illumination wavelengths are synchronized such that each of the CMBFs allows transmission of only the alternate illumination wavelength bands. And the transmission bandwidths of CMBFs are complementary to each other, so that when one transmits, the other one blocks. This can be clearly understood if the wavelength bands are divided broadly into red, green, and blue, then the illumination wavelengths contain two bands in red (R1, R2), two bands in green (G1, G2), and two bands in blue (B1, B2). Therefore, when the objective is illuminated by R1, the reflected light enters through only the left-CMBF as the R1 band corresponds to the transmission window of the left CMBF at the left pupil. This is blocked by the right CMBF. The transmitted band is focused on the focal plane array (FPA)

Risk of colorectal cancer in men on long-term androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Background Androgen deprivation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists or orchiectomy is a common but controversial treatment for prostate cancer. Uncertainties remain about its use, particularly with increasing recognition of serious side effects. In animal studies, androgens protect against colonic carcinogenesis, suggesting that androgen deprivation may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Methods We identified 107 859 men in the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database who were diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1993 through 2002, with follow-up available through 2004. The primary outcome was development of colorectal cancer, determined from SEER files on second primary cancers. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the influence of androgen deprivation on the outcome, adjusted for patient and prostate cancer characteristics. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Men who had orchiectomies had the highest unadjusted incidence rate of colorectal cancer (6.3 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.3 to 7.5), followed by men who had GnRH agonist therapy (4.4 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI = 4.0 to 4.9), and men who had no androgen deprivation (3.7 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI = 3.5 to 3.9). After adjustment for patient and prostate cancer characteristics, there was a statistically significant dose-response effect (Ptrend = .010) with an increasing risk of colorectal cancer associated with increasing duration of androgen deprivation. Compared with the absence of these treatments, there was an increased risk of colorectal cancer associated with use of GnRH agonist therapy for 25 months or longer (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.53) or with orchiectomy (HR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.14 to 1.66). Conclusion Long-term androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cance

Endoscope and System and Method of Operation Thereof

An endoscope including a rigid section having opposed first and second ends and an opening situated between the first and second ends, the rigid section defining a longitudinal axis; a handle portion coupled to a first end of the rigid section and having first and second scissor-type handles suitable for grasping by a user; and a base part situated at the second end of the rigid section and coupled to the first handle of the scissor-type handles such that displacement of the first handle causes a rotation of the base part

Timing of androgen deprivation therapy use and fracture risk among elderly men with prostate cancer in the United States

Purpose Fractures are a recognized consequence of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT); however, less is known about the incidence of fracture in relation to the timing of ADT use or the impact of fracture on mortality in men with prostate cancer. Methods Using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked database, we estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) using time‐dependent Cox regression for fracture incidence related to the recency of exposure and dose among prostate cancer patients on gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, as well as mortality associated with fractures. Results In our cohort of 80 844 patients, ADT was associated with an increased rate of fracture in both non‐metastatic patients (aHR = 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.29–1.39) and metastatic patients (aHR = 1.51; 95%CI = 1.36–1.67). Fracture rates increased with increasing cumulative GnRH dose but decreased with increasing number of months since last use in each dose category. The mortality rate doubled for men experiencing a fracture after their diagnosis compared with that for men who did not experience a fracture (aHR = 2.05; 95%CI = 1.98–2.12). Conclusions ADT in elderly men with prostate cancer increased the incidence of fractures, and the effect appears to diminish with increasing time since the last dose of a GnRH agonist. Experiencing a fracture after the diagnosis of prostate cancer was associated with decreased survival. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90397/1/pds2258.pd

Adjustable-Viewing-Angle Endoscopic Tool for Skull Base and Brain Surgery

The term Multi-Angle and Rear Viewing Endoscopic tooL (MARVEL) denotes an auxiliary endoscope, now undergoing development, that a surgeon would use in conjunction with a conventional endoscope to obtain additional perspective. The role of the MARVEL in endoscopic brain surgery would be similar to the role of a mouth mirror in dentistry. Such a tool is potentially useful for in-situ planetary geology applications for the close-up imaging of unexposed rock surfaces in cracks or those not in the direct line of sight. A conventional endoscope provides mostly a frontal view that is, a view along its longitudinal axis and, hence, along a straight line extending from an opening through which it is inserted. The MARVEL could be inserted through the same opening as that of the conventional endoscope, but could be adjusted to provide a view from almost any desired angle. The MARVEL camera image would be displayed, on the same monitor as that of the conventional endoscopic image, as an inset within the conventional endoscopic image. For example, while viewing a tumor from the front in the conventional endoscopic image, the surgeon could simultaneously view the tumor from the side or the rear in the MARVEL image, and could thereby gain additional visual cues that would aid in precise three-dimensional positioning of surgical tools to excise the tumor. Indeed, a side or rear view through the MARVEL could be essential in a case in which the object of surgical interest was not visible from the front. The conceptual design of the MARVEL exploits the surgeon s familiarity with endoscopic surgical tools. The MARVEL would include a miniature electronic camera and miniature radio transmitter mounted on the tip of a surgical tool derived from an endo-scissor (see figure). The inclusion of the radio transmitter would eliminate the need for wires, which could interfere with manipulation of this and other surgical tools. The handgrip of the tool would be connected to a linkage similar to that of an endo-scissor, but the linkage would be configured to enable adjustment of the camera angle instead of actuation of a scissor blade. It is envisioned that thicknesses of the tool shaft and the camera would be less than 4 mm, so that the camera-tipped tool could be swiftly inserted and withdrawn through a dime-size opening. Electronic cameras having dimensions of the order of millimeters are already commercially available, but their designs are not optimized for use in endoscopic brain surgery. The variety of potential endoscopic, thoracoscopic, and laparoscopic applications can be expected to increase as further development of electronic cameras yields further miniaturization and improvements in imaging performance

Endoscope and System and Method of Operation Thereof

An endoscope including a rigid section having opposed first and second ends and an opening situated between the first and second ends, the rigid section defining a longitudinal axis; a handle portion coupled to a first end of the rigid section and having first and second scissor-type handles suitable for grasping by a user; and a base part situated at the second end of the rigid section and coupled to the first handle of the scissor-type handles such that displacement of the first handle causes a rotation of the base part