Dutasteride treatment over 2 years delays prostate-specific antigen progression in patients with biochemical failure after radical therapy for prostate cancer: Results from the randomised, placebo-controlled avodart after radical therapy for Prostate Cancer Study (ARTS)

Background: Rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after radical therapy are indicative of recurrent or residual prostate cancer (PCa). This biochemical recurrence typically predates clinically detectable metastatic disease by several years. Management of patients with biochemical recurrence is controversial. Objective: To assess the effect of dutasteride on progression of PCa in patients with biochemical failure after radical therapy. Design, setting, and participants: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 294 men from 64 centres across 9 European countries. Intervention: The 5α-reductase inhibitor, dutasteride. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary end point was time to PSA doubling from start of randomised treatment, analysed by log-rank test stratified by previous therapy and investigative-site cluster. Secondary end points included time to disease progression and the proportion of subjects with disease progression. Results and limitations: Of the 294 subjects randomised (147 in each treatment group), 187 (64%) completed 24 mo of treatment and 107 discontinued treatment prematurely (71 [48%] of the placebo group, 36 [24%] of the dutasteride group). Dutasteride significantly delayed the time to PSA doubling compared with placebo after 24 mo of treatment (p < 0.001); the relative risk (RR) reduction was 66.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50.35-76.90) for the overall study period. Dutasteride also significantly delayed disease progression (which included PSA- and non-PSA-related outcomes) compared with placebo (p < 0.001); the overall RR reduction in favour of dutasteride was 59% (95% CI, 32.53-75.09). The incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs leading to study withdrawal were similar between the treatment groups. A limitation was that investigators were not blinded to PSA levels during the study. Conclusions: Dutasteride delayed the biochemical progression of PCa in patients with biochemical failure after radical therapy for clinically localised disease. The safety and tolerability of dutasteride were generally consistent with previous experience. Clinical trial registry: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00558363

Expert consensus document: Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer — results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure

Active surveillance (AS) is broadly described as a management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer, but semantic heterogeneity exists in both the literature and in guidelines. To address this issue, a panel of leading prostate cancer specialists in the field of AS participated in a consensus-forming project using a modified Delphi method to reach international consensus on definitions of terms related to this management option. An iterative three-round sequence of online questionnaires designed to address 61 individual items was completed by each panel member. Consensus was considered to be reached if ≥70% of the experts agreed on a definition. To facilitate a common understanding among all experts involved and resolve potential ambiguities, a face-to-face consensus meeting was held between Delphi survey rounds two and three. Convenience sampling was used to construct the panel of experts. In total, 12 experts from Australia, France, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, the UK, Canada and the USA participated. By the end of the Delphi process, formal consensus was achieved for 100% (n = 61) of the terms and a glossary was then developed. Agreement between international experts has been reached on relevant terms and subsequent definitions regarding AS for patients with localized prostate cancer. This standard terminology could support multidisciplinary communication, reduce the extent of variations in clinical practice and optimize clinical decision making

Methodology of the DCCSS later fatigue study:a model to investigate chronic fatigue in long-term survivors of childhood cancer

Background: A debilitating late effect for childhood cancer survivors (CCS) is cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Little is known about the prevalence and risk factors of fatigue in this population. Here we describe the methodology of the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Late Effect Study on fatigue (DCCSS LATER fatigue study). The aim of the DCCSS LATER fatigue study is to examine the prevalence of and factors associated with CRF, proposing a model which discerns predisposing, triggering, maintaining and moderating factors. Triggering factors are related to the cancer diagnosis and treatment during childhood and are thought to trigger fatigue symptoms. Maintaining factors are daily life- and psychosocial factors which may perpetuate fatigue once triggered. Moderating factors might influence the way fatigue symptoms express in individuals. Predisposing factors already existed before the diagnosis, such as genetic factors, and are thought to increase the vulnerability to develop fatigue. Methodology of the participant inclusion, data collection and planned analyses of the DCCSS LATER fatigue study are presented. Results: Data of 1955 CCS and 455 siblings was collected. Analysis of the data is planned and we aim to start reporting the first results in 2022. Conclusion: The DCCSS LATER fatigue study will provide information on the epidemiology of CRF and investigate the role of a broad range of associated factors in CCS. Insight in associated factors for fatigue in survivors experiencing severe and persistent fatigue may help identify individuals at risk for developing CRF and may aid in the development of interventions.</p

Oncologic outcomes of screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 colorectal cancers

Background:The incidence of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased with the implementation of CRC screening programs. It is unknown whether the outcomes and risk models for T1 CRC based on non-screen-detected patients can be extrapolated to screen-detected T1 CRC. This study aimed to compare the stage distribution and oncologic outcomes of T1 CRC patients within and outside the screening program. Methods: Data from T1 CRC patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 were collected from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. The presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) at diagnosis was compared between screen-detected and non-screen-detected patients using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyze differences in the time to recurrence (TTR), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival. Additionally, the performance of conventional risk factors for LNM was evaluated across the groups. Results: 1803 patients were included (1114 [62%] screendetected), with median follow-up of 51 months (interquartile range 30). The proportion of LNM did not significantly differ between screen- and non-screen-detected patients (12.6% vs. 8.9%; odds ratio 1.41; 95%CI 0.89-2.23); a prediction model for LNM performed equally in both groups. The 3- and 5-year TTR, MFS, and CSS were similar for patients within and outside the screening program. However, overall survival was significantly longer in screen-detected T1 CRC patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51; 95%CI 0.38- 0.68). Conclusions: Screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 CRCs have similar stage distributions and oncologic outcomes and can therefore be treated equally. However, screen-detected T1 CRC patients exhibit a lower rate of non-CRC-related mortality, resulting in longer overall survival.</p

Adult height, coronary heart disease and stroke: a multi-locus Mendelian randomization meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: We investigated causal effect of completed growth, measured by adult height, on coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and cardiovascular traits, using instrumental variable (IV) Mendelian randomization meta-analysis. METHODS: We developed an allele score based on 69 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with adult height, identified by the IBCCardioChip, and used it for IV analysis against cardiovascular risk factors and events in 21 studies and 60 028 participants. IV analysis on CHD was supplemented by summary data from 180 height-SNPs from the GIANT consortium and their corresponding CHD estimates derived from CARDIoGRAMplusC4D. RESULTS: IV estimates from IBCCardioChip and GIANT-CARDIoGRAMplusC4D showed that a 6.5-cm increase in height reduced the odds of CHD by 10% [odds ratios 0.90; 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.78 to 1.03 and 0.85 to 0.95, respectively],which agrees with the estimate from the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration (hazard ratio 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91 to 0.94). IV analysis revealed no association with stroke (odds ratio 0.97; 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.19). IV analysis showed that a 6.5-cm increase in height resulted in lower levels of body mass index (P < 0.001), triglycerides (P < 0.001), non high-density (non-HDL) cholesterol (P < 0.001), C-reactive protein (P = 0.042), and systolic blood pressure (P = 0.064) and higher levels of forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity (P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Taller individuals have a lower risk of CHD with potential explanations being that taller people have a better lung function and lower levels of body mass index, cholesterol and blood pressure

Cribriform architecture in radical prostatectomies predicts oncological outcome in Gleason score 8 prostate cancer patients

The Gleason score is an important parameter for clinical outcome in prostate cancer patients. Gleason score 8 is a heterogeneous disease including Gleason score 3 + 5, 4 + 4, and 5 + 3 tumors, and encompasses a broad range of tumor growth patterns. Our objective was to characterize individual growth patterns and identify prognostic parameters in Gleason score 8 prostate cancer patients. We reviewed 1064 radical prostatectomy specimens, recorded individual Gleason 4 and 5 growth patterns as well as presence of intraductal carcinoma, and evaluated biochemical recurrence- and metastasis-free survival. Gleason score 8 disease was identified in 140 (13%) patients, of whom 76 (54%) had Gleason score 3 + 5, 46 (33%) 4 + 4, and 18 (13%) 5 + 3 disease. Invasive cribriform and/or intraductal carcinoma (n = 87, 62%) was observed more frequently in Gleason score 4 + 4 (93%) than 3 + 5 (47%; P < 0.001) and 5 + 3 (44%; P < 0.001) patients. Gleason pattern 5 was present in 110 (79%) men: as single cells and/or cords in 99 (90%) and solid fields in 32 (29%) cases. Solid field pattern 5 coexisted with cribriform architecture (23/32, 72%) more frequently than nonsolid pattern 5 cases (36/78, 46%, P = 0.02). In multivariable analysis including age, prostate-specific antigen, pT-stage, surgical margin status, and lymph node metastases, presence of cribriform architecture was an independent parameter for biochemical recurrence-free (hazard ratio (HR) 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0–3.7; P = 0.04) and metastasis-free (HR 3.5, 95% CI 1.0–12.3; P = 0.05) survival. In conclusion, invasive cribriform and/or intraductal carcinoma occurs more frequently in Gleason score 4 + 4 prostate cancer patients than in Gleason score 3 + 5 and 5 + 3, and is an independent parameter for biochemical recurrence and metastasis. Therefore, cribriform architecture has added value in risk stratification of Gleason score 8 prostate cancer patients

Impact of nationwide enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care (PACAP-1): A multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. Best practices for the use of chemotherapy, enzyme replacement therapy, and biliary drainage have been identified but their implementation in daily clinical practice is often suboptimal. We hypothesized that a nationwide program to enhance implementation of these best practices in pancreatic cancer care would improve survival and quality of life. Methods/design: PACAP-1 is a nationwide multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled superiority trial. In a per-center stepwise and randomized manner, best practices in pancreatic cancer care regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and metal biliary stents are implemented in all 17 Dutch pancreatic centers and their regional referral networks during a 6-week initiation period. Per pancreatic center, one multidisciplinary team functions as reference for the other centers in the network. Key best practices were identified from the literature, 3 years of data from existing nationwide registries within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP), and national expert meetings. The best practices follow the Dutch guideline on pancreatic cancer and the current state of the literature, and can be executed within daily clinical practice. The implementation process includes monitoring, return visits, and provider feedback in combination with education and reminders. Patient outcomes and compliance are monitored within the PACAP registries. Primary outcome is 1-year overall survival (for all disease stages). Secondary outcomes include quality of life, 3- and 5-year overall survival, and guideline compliance. An improvement of 10% in 1-year overall survival is considered clinically relevant. A 25-month study duration was chosen, which provides 80% statistical power for a mortality reduction of 10.0% in the 17 pancreatic cancer centers, with a required sample size of 2142 patients, corresponding to a 6.6% mortality reduction and 4769 patients nationwide. Discussion: The PACAP-1 trial is designed to evaluate whether a nationwide program for enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care can improve 1-year overall survival and quality of life. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03513705. Trial opened for accrual on 22th May 2018