Type of treatment, symptoms and patient satisfaction play an important role in primary care contact during prostate cancer follow-up:Results from the population-based PROFILES registry

BACKGROUND: With the increasing attention for the role of General Practitioners (GPs) after cancer treatment, it is important to better understand the involvement of GPs following prostate cancer treatment. This study investigates factors associated with GP contact during follow-up of prostate cancer survivors, such as patient, treatment and symptom variables, and satisfaction with, trust in, and appraised knowledge of GPs. METHODS: Of 787 prostate cancer survivors diagnosed between 2007 and 2013, and selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, 557 (71%) responded to the invitation to complete a questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate which variables were associated with GP contact during follow- up. RESULTS: In total, 200 (42%) prostate cancer survivors had contact with their GP during follow-up, and 76 (16%) survivors preferred more contact. Survivors who had an intermediate versus low educational level (OR = 2.0) were more likely to have had contact with their GP during follow-up. Survivors treated with surgery (OR = 2.8) or hormonal therapy (OR = 3.5) were also more likely to seek follow-up care from their GP compared to survivors who were treated with active surveillance. Patient reported bowel symptoms (OR = 1.4), hormonal symptoms (OR = 1.4), use of incontinence aids (OR = 1.6), and being satisfied with their GP (OR = 9.5) were also significantly associated with GP contact during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Education, treatment, symptoms and patient satisfaction were associated with GP contact during prostate cancer follow-up. These findings highlight the potential for adverse side-effects to be managed in primary care. In light of future changes in cancer care, evaluating prostate cancer follow-up in primary care remains important

Risk stratification and treatment effect of statins in secondary cardiovascular prevention in old age: additive value of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide

Background To date, no validated risk scores exist for prediction of recurrence risk or potential treatment effect for older people with a history of a cardiovascular event. Therefore, we assessed predictive values for recurrent cardiovascular disease of models with age and sex, traditional cardiovascular risk markers, and ‘SMART risk score’, all with and without addition of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). Treatment effect of pravastatin was assessed across low and high risk groups identified by the best performing models. Design and methods Post-hoc analysis in 2348 participants (age 70–82 years) with a history of cardiovascular disease within the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER) study. Composite endpoint was a recurrent cardiovascular event/cardiovascular mortality. Results The models with age and sex, traditional risk markers and SMART risk score had comparable predictive values (area under the curve (AUC) 0.58, 0.61 and 0.59, respectively). Addition of NT-proBNP to these models improved AUCs with 0.07 (p for difference ((pdiff)) = 0.003), 0.05 (pdiff = 0.009) and 0.06 (pdiff < 0.001), respectively. For the model with age, sex and NT-proBNP, the hazard ratio for the composite endpoint in pravastatin users compared with placebo was 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.49–0.90) for those in the highest third of predicted risk and 0.91 (0.57–1.46) in the lowest third, number needed to treat 12 and 115 (pdiff = 0.038) respectively. Conclusion In secondary cardiovascular prevention in old age addition of NT-proBNP improves prediction of recurrent cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular mortality and treatment effect of pravastatin. A minimal model including age, sex and NT-proBNP predicts as accurately as complex risk models including NT-proBNP

Immediate treatment vs. active-surveillance in very-low-risk prostate cancer: the role of patient-, tumour-, and hospital-related factors

Item does not contain fulltex

Immediate treatment vs. active-surveillance in very-low-risk prostate cancer: the role of patient-, tumour-, and hospital-related factors

Background: To provide insight in the treatment variation of very-low-risk prostate cancer patients and to assess the role of hospital-related factors. Methods: All patients diagnosed with very-low-risk prostate cancer (cT1c-cT2a, PSA < 10 ng/ml, Gleason score <7 and <3 positive cores) in 2015 and 2016 were identified through the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the crude and case-mix adjusted probability of immediate treatment vs. active-surveillance (AS) according to hospital of diagnosis and to evaluate the effect of patient-, tumour-, and hospital-related factors. Results: In all, 2047 (85.4%) of the 2396 patients with very-low-risk prostate cancer were managed with AS. The crude proportion of patients with AS varied from 33.3 to 100% between hospitals. Case-mix adjusted probability varied from 71 to 97%. Tumour stage cT2a vs. cT1c (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.1−3.6), two vs. one positive core (OR 2.8, 95%CI 1.6−4.7), diagnostic MRI (OR 2.8, 95%CI 1.5−5.2), discussion of a patient in a multi-disciplinary team (OR 2.2, 95%CI 1.1−4.5), discussion of treatment options with the patient (OR 3.3, 95%CI 1.5−7.4) and type of hospital (non-university referral hospital vs. community hospital: OR 0.5, 95%CI 0.2−0.9) were associated with immediate treatment. Conclusion: The majority of Dutch very-low-risk prostate cancer patients is managed with AS but variation between hospitals exists. Part of the variation is explained by patient- and tumour characteristics but also hospital-related factors play a role. This implies that clinical practice could be improved

Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR

Background: The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur. Aim: We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. Methods: Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology. Results: The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive - Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks

Cancer survivors' preference for follow-up care providers: A cross-sectional study from the population-based PROFILES-registry

Background: The best practice for the organization of follow-up care in oncology is under debate, due to growing numbers of cancer survivors. Understanding survivors' preferences for follow-up care is elementary for designing patient-centred care. Based on data from prostate cancer and melanoma survivors, this study aims to identify: 1) preferences for follow-up care providers, for instance the medical specialist, the oncology nurse or the general practitioner; 2) characteristics associated with these preferences and 3) the preferred care provider to discuss cancer-related problems. Material and methods: Survivors diagnosed with prostate cancer (N = 535) and melanoma (N = 232) between 2007 and 2013 as registered in The Netherlands Cancer Registry returned a questionnaire (response rate was 71% and 69%, respectively). A latent class cluster model analysis was used to define preferences and a multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to identify survivor-related characteristics associated with these preferences. Results: Of all survivors, 29% reported no preference, 40% reported a preference for the medical specialist, 20% reported a preference for both the medical specialist and the general practitioner and 11% reported a preference for both the medical specialist and the oncology nurse. Survivors who were older, lower/intermediate educated and women were more likely to have a preference for the medical specialist. Lower educated survivors were less likely to have a preference for both the medical specialist and the general practitioner. Overall, survivors prefer to discuss diet, physical fitness and fatigue with the general practitioner, and hereditary and recurrence with the medical specialist. Only a small minority favored to discuss cancer-related problems with the oncology nurse. Conclusions: Survivors reported different preferences for follow-up care providers based on age, education level, gender and satisfaction with the general practitioner, showing a need for tailored follow-up care in oncology. The results indicate an urgency to educate patients about transitions in follow-up care

Variation in the Prescription of Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radiotherapy in the Netherlands, and Adherence to European Association of Urology Guidelines: A Population-based Study

Background: According to (inter-)national guidelines, (neo-)adjuvant and concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in combination with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is optional for intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients and is the recommended standard treatment for high-risk PCa patients. Objective: The aim of this study is to provide insight into the prescription of ADT in intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT in the Netherlands, and to evaluate adherence to European Association of Urology guidelines and factors affecting prescription. Design, setting, and participants: All intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients between October 2015 and April 2016 were identified through the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Variation in the prescription of ADT in patients with EBRT was evaluated. Multivariable multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the probability of ADT and to examine the role of patient-, tumour-, and hospital-related factors. Results and limitations: Overall, 29% of patients with intermediate-risk PCa received ADT varying from 3% to 73% between institutions. From the multivariable regression analysis, higher Gleason grade, magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography (CT)-positron-emission tomography/CT prior to radiotherapy appeared to be associated with increased prescription of ADT. Among high-risk patients, 83% received ADT, varying from 57% to 100% between departments. A higher prostate-specific antigen level, more advanced tumour stage, and a higher Gleason grade were associated with increased prescription. Conclusions: Less than one-third of intermediate-risk PCa patients treated with EBRT receive ADT. The variation in the prescription of ADT between different institutions is substantial. This suggests that the prescription is largely dependent on different institutional policies. The guideline adherence in high-risk PCa is fairly good, as the vast majority of patients received ADT as recommended. However, given the clear recommendations in the guidelines, adherence could be improved. Patient summary: In this review, we looked at the variation of hormonal treatment in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients. We found substantial variation between institutions

Short-term Changes in Health-related Quality of Life of Patients Undergoing Radical Surgery for Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: Results from a Prospective Phase 2 Clinical Trial

Background and objective: The possible negative impact of radical surgery on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) plays an important role in preoperative counseling. Here, we analyzed the HRQoL of patients treated for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) in the context of a single-arm phase 2 multicenter study, in which the safety and efficacy of a single preoperative intravesical instillation with mitomycin C were investigated. Our objective was to investigate early changes in HRQoL in patients undergoing radical surgery for UTUC and identify factors associated with these outcomes. Methods: Patients with pTanyN0-1M0 UTUC were prospectively included. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire at baseline, and at 1 and 3 mo after surgery. A linear mixed model was used to evaluate the changes in HRQoL over time and identify the variables associated with these outcomes. The clinical effect size was used to assess the clinical impact and level of perceptibility of HRQoL changes for clinicians and/or patients based on given thresholds. Key findings and limitations: Between 2017 and 2020, 186 patients were included. At baseline, 1 mo after surgery, and 3 mo after surgery, response rates were 91%, 84%, and 78%, respectively. One month after surgery, a statistically significant and clinically relevant deterioration was observed in physical, role, and social functioning, and for the included symptom scales: constipation, fatigue, and pain. An improvement in emotional functioning was observed. At 3 mo, HRQoL returned to baseline levels, except emotional functioning, which improved at 1 mo and persisted to be better than that before surgery. Age >70 yr was associated with worse physical functioning, but better social and emotional functioning. Male patients reported better emotional functioning than females. Postoperative complications were negatively associated with social functioning. Conclusions and clinical implications: UTUC patients treated with radical surgery experienced a significant, albeit temporary, decline in HRQoL. Three months following surgery, HRQoL outcomes returned to baseline levels. This information can be used to counsel UTUC patients before undergoing radical surgery and contextualize recovery after surgery. Patient summary: We investigated the changes in quality of life as reported by patients who underwent surgery for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). We found that patients experienced a decline in quality of life 1 mo after surgery, but this was temporary, with full recovery of quality of life 3 mo after surgery. These findings can help doctors and other medical staff in counseling UTUC patients before undergoing radical surgery

Robot-assisted Versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Bladder Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Alongside a Multicentre Comparative Effectiveness Study

Background: Open radical cystectomy (ORC) is regarded as the standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly used in practice. A recent study showed that RARC resulted in slightly fewer minor but slightly more major complications, although the difference was not statistically significant. Some differences were found in secondary outcomes favouring either RARC or ORC. RARC use is expected to increase in coming years, which fuels the debate about whether RARC provides value for money. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of RARC compared to ORC in bladder cancer. Design, setting, and participants: This economic evaluation was performed alongside a prospective multicentre comparative effectiveness study. We included 348 bladder cancer patients (ORC, n = 168; RARC, n = 180) from 19 Dutch hospitals. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Over 1 yr, we assessed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from both healthcare and societal perspectives. We used single imputation nested in the bootstrap percentile method to assess missing data and uncertainty, and inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for potential bias. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the impact of various parameters on the cost difference. Results and limitations: The mean healthcare cost per patient was €17 141 (95% confidence interval [CI] €15 791–€18 720) for ORC and €21 266 (95% CI €19 163–€23 650) for RARC. The mean societal cost per patient was €18 926 (95% CI €17 431–€22 642) for ORC and €24 896 (95% CI €21 925–€31 888) for RARC. On average, RARC patients gained 0.79 QALYs (95% CI 0.74–0.85) compared to 0.81 QALYs (95% CI 0.77–0.85) for ORC patients, resulting in a mean QALY difference of −0.02 (95% CI −0.05 to 0.02). Using a cost-effectiveness threshold of €80 000, RARC was cost-effective in 0.6% and 0.2% of the replications for the healthcare and societal perspectives, respectively. Conclusions: RARC shows no difference in terms of QALYs, but is more expensive than ORC. Hence, RARC does not seem to provide value for money in comparison to ORC. Patient summary: This study assessed the relation between costs and effects of robot-assisted surgery compared to open surgery for removal of the bladder in 348 Dutch patients with bladder cancer. We found that after 1 year, the two approaches were similarly effective according to a measure called quality-adjusted life years, but robot-assisted surgery was much more expensive. This trial was prospectively registered in the Netherlands Trial Register as NTR5362 (https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5214)