| 1. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk of Incisional Hernia after Minimally Invasive and Open Radical Prostatectomy
- 2013
-
Ingår i: The Journal of urology. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1527-3792 .- 0022-5347. ; 190:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE:: The number of radical prostatectomies has increased. Many urologists have shifted from the open surgical approach to minimally invasive techniques. It is not clear whether the risk of post-prostatectomy incisional hernia varies by surgical approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS:: In the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset we identified men age 66 and older who had minimally invasive (MIRP) or open radical prostatectomy (ORP) for prostate cancer diagnosed 2003-2007. The main outcome was incisional hernia repair identified in Medicare claims following prostatectomy. We also examined the frequency of umbilical, inguinal and other hernia repairs. RESULTS:: We identified 3,199 patients who had MIRP and 6,795 who had open radical prostatectomy ORP. The frequency of incisional hernia repair was 5.3% (median follow-up 3.1 years) in the MIRP group and 1.9% (median follow-up 4.4 years) in the ORP group, corresponding to incidence rates of 16.1 and 4.5 per 1000 person-years for MIRP and ORP, respectively. Compared with ORP, MIRP was associated with a more than 3-fold increased risk of incisional hernia repair, controlling for patient and disease characteristics (adjusted hazard ratio 3.39, 95% CI, 2.63-4.38, p <0.0001). MIRP was associated with an attenuated but increased risk of any hernia repair compared with ORP (adjusted hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.29-1.70, p <0.0001), driven by incisional hernias. CONCLUSIONS:: MIRP was associated with a significantly increased risk of incisional hernia compared with ORP. This is a potentially remediable complication of prostate cancer surgery that warrants increased vigilance with respect to surgical technique.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid V., et al.
(författare)
-
A Provider-Facing Decision Support Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care : A Pilot Study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Applied Clinical Informatics. - 1869-0327. ; 15:2, s. 274-281
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Our objective was to pilot test an electronic health record-embedded decision support tool to facilitate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening discussions in the primary care setting. Methods We pilot-tested a novel decision support tool that was used by 10 primary care physicians (PCPs) for 6 months, followed by a survey. The tool comprised (1) a risk-stratified algorithm, (2) a tool for facilitating shared decision-making (Simple Schema), (3) three best practice advisories (BPAs: <45, 45-75, and >75 years), and (4) a health maintenance module for scheduling automated reminders about PSA rescreening. Results All PCPs found the tool feasible, acceptable, and clear to use. Eight out of ten PCPs reported that the tool made PSA screening conversations somewhat or much easier. Before using the tool, 70% of PCPs felt confident in their ability to discuss PSA screening with their patient, and this improved to 100% after the tool was used by PCPs for 6 months. PCPs found the BPAs for eligible (45-75 years) and older men (>75 years) more useful than the BPA for younger men (<45 years). Among the 10 PCPs, 60% found the Simple Schema to be very useful, and 50% found the health maintenance module to be extremely or very useful. Most PCPs reported the components of the tool to be at least somewhat useful, with 10% finding them to be very burdensome. Conclusion We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the tool, which is notable given the marked low acceptance of existing tools. All PCPs reported that they would consider continuing to use the tool in their clinic and were likely or very likely to recommend the tool to a colleague.
|
|
| 3. |
- Carlsson, Sigrid V., et al.
(författare)
-
Provider Perceptions of an Electronic Health Record Prostate Cancer Screening Tool
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Applied Clinical Informatics. - 1869-0327. ; 15:2, s. 282-294
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives We conducted a focus group to assess the attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) toward prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-screening algorithms, perceptions of using decision support tools, and features that would make such tools feasible to implement. Methods A multidisciplinary team (primary care, urology, behavioral sciences, bioinformatics) developed the decision support tool that was presented to a focus group of 10 PCPs who also filled out a survey. Notes and audio-recorded transcripts were analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. Results The survey showed that PCPs followed different guidelines. In total, 7/10 PCPs agreed that engaging in shared decision-making about PSA screening was burdensome. The majority (9/10) had never used a decision aid for PSA screening. Although 70% of PCPs felt confident about their ability to discuss PSA screening, 90% still felt a need for a provider-facing platform to assist in these discussions. Three major themes emerged: (1) confirmatory reactions regarding the importance, innovation, and unmet need for a decision support tool embedded in the electronic health record; (2) issues around implementation and application of the tool in clinic workflow and PCPs' own clinical bias; and (3) attitudes/reflections regarding discrepant recommendations from various guideline groups that cause confusion. Conclusion There was overwhelmingly positive support for the need for a provider-facing decision support tool to assist with PSA-screening decisions in the primary care setting. PCPs appreciated that the tool would allow flexibility for clinical judgment and documentation of shared decision-making. Incorporation of suggestions from this focus group into a second version of the tool will be used in subsequent pilot testing.
|
|
| 4. |
- Fridriksson, Jón O., et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term adverse effects after curative radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy : population-based nationwide register study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Urology. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 2168-1805 .- 2168-1813. ; 50:5, s. 338-345
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the risk of serious adverse effects after radiotherapy (RT) with curative intention and radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials and methods: Men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1997 and 2012 and underwent curative treatment were selected from the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden. For each included man, five prostate cancer-free controls, matched for birth year and county of residency, were randomly selected. In total, 12,534 men underwent RT, 24,886 underwent RP and 186,624 were controls. Adverse effects were defined according to surgical and diagnostic codes in the National Patient Registry. The relative risk (RR) of adverse effects up to 12 years after treatment was compared to controls and the risk was subsequently compared between RT and RP in multivariable analyses. Results: Men with intermediate- and localized high-risk cancer who underwent curative treatment had an increased risk of adverse effects during the full study period compared to controls: the RR of undergoing a procedures after RT was 2.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.56–2.73] and after RP 2.05 (95% CI 2.00–2.10). The risk remained elevated 10–12 years after treatment. For all risk categories of prostate cancer, the risk of surgical procedures for urinary incontinence was higher after RP (RR 23.64, 95% CI 11.71–47.74), whereas risk of other procedures on the lower urinary tract and gastrointestinal tract or abdominal wall was higher after RT (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.44–1.94, and RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.70–2.02, respectively). Conclusion: The risk of serious adverse effects after curative treatment for prostate cancer remained significantly elevated up to 12 years after treatment.
|
|
| 5. |
- Gaffney, Christopher D., et al.
(författare)
-
A brief mind-body intervention to reduce pain and anxiety during prostate needle biopsy: a clinically integrated randomized controlled trial with 2-staged consent
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. - 1078-1439 .- 1873-2496. ; 41:12, s. 484.e1-484.e5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Many patients experience pain, anxiety, and discomfort with prostate biopsy, which may discourage enrollment in active surveillance programs or follow-up biopsy. Guided meditation can significantly reduce pain and anxiety during percutaneous biopsy. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief mind-body intervention on patient-reported outcomes after prostate biopsy. Methods and materials: We performed a clinically-integrated randomized controlled trial of a brief mind-body intervention during biopsy compared to usual care at a single tertiary care center from 2018 to 2022. All patients offered transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in the clinic with local anesthesia were eligible for enrollment. This clinically integrated trial was conducted simultaneously with a randomized controlled trial of 1-stage and 2-stage consent. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain, anxiety, discomfort, and tolerability on a visual-analog scale (0–10). A 15% improvement was prespecified as clinically relevant. We compared the proportion of men in each arm reporting a severe score (7–10) on any of the 4 scales using Fisher's exact test and then compared means for each scale separately using ANCOVA with randomization stratum (first vs. prior biopsy) as a covariate. Results: Of 263 eligible patients, 238 enrolled (119 per arm). One hundred seventy-two (72%) enrolled with 2-stage consent. A total of 37/94 (39%) and 38/102 (37%) patients randomized to usual care and intervention, respectively, reported severe scores in any of the 4 domains, a difference of 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] -13, 17%, P = 0.8). There was no evidence of a difference in mean postbiopsy anxiety (P = 0.3), discomfort (P = 0.09), pain (P = 0.4) or tolerability scores (P = 0.2). Conclusions: A clinically meaningful benefit for this brief mind-body intervention during prostate biopsy is unlikely. Robust patient enrollment is feasible using 2-stage consent.
|
|
| 6. |
- Rasmussen, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Independent validation of a pre-specified four-kallikrein marker model for prediction of adverse pathology and biochemical recurrence
- 2022
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 126:7, s. 1004-1009
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Accurate markers for prostate cancer (PC) risk stratification could aid decision-making for initial management strategies. The 4Kscore has an undefined role in predicting outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: We included 1476 patients with 4Kscore measured prior to RP at two institutions. The 4Kscore was assessed for prediction of adverse pathology at RP and biochemical recurrence (BCR) relative to a clinical model. We pre-specified that all analyses would be assessed in biopsy Grade Group 1 (GG1) or 2 (GG2) PC patients, separately. Results: The 4Kscore increased discrimination for adverse pathology in all patients (delta area under the receiver operative curve (AUC) 0.009, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.002, 0.016; clinical model AUC 0.767), driven by GG1 (delta AUC 0.040, 95% CI 0.006, 0.073) rather than GG2 patients (delta AUC 0.005, 95% CI −0.012, 0.021). Adding 4Kscore improved prediction of BCR in all patients (delta C-index 0.014, 95% CI 0.007, 0.021; preop-BCR nomogram C-index 0.738), again with larger changes in GG1 than in GG2. Conclusions: This study validates prior investigations on the use of 4Kscore in men with biopsy-confirmed PC. Men with GG1 PC and a high 4Kscore may benefit from additional testing to guide treatment selection. Further research is warranted regarding the value of the 4Kscore in men with biopsy GG2 PC.
|
|
| 7. |
- Van Hemelrijck, Mieke, et al.
(författare)
-
Reasons for Discontinuing Active Surveillance : Assessment of 21 Centres in 12 Countries in the Movember GAP3 Consortium
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838. ; 75:3, s. 523-531
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Careful assessment of the reasons for discontinuation of active surveillance (AS) is required for men with prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: Using Movember's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance initiative (GAP3) database, we report on reasons for AS discontinuation. Design, setting, and participants: We compared data from 10 296 men on AS from 21 centres across 12 countries. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cumulative incidence methods were used to estimate the cumulative incidence rates of AS discontinuation. Results and limitations: During 5-yr follow-up, 27.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.4–28.6%) men showed signs of disease progression, 12.8% (95% CI: 12.0–13.6%) converted to active treatment without evidence of progression, 1.7% (95% CI: 1.5–2.0%) continued to watchful waiting, and 1.7% (95% CI: 1.4–2.1%) died from other causes. Of the 7049 men who remained on AS, 2339 had follow-up for >5 yr, 4561 had follow-up for <5 yr, and 149 were lost to follow-up. Cumulative incidence of progression was 27.5% (95% CI: 26.4–28.6%) at 5 yr and 38.2% (95% CI: 36.7–39.9%) at 10 yr. A limitation is that not all centres were included due to limited information on the reason for discontinuation and limited follow-up. Conclusions: Our descriptive analyses of current AS practices worldwide showed that 43.6% of men drop out of AS during 5-yr follow-up, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Improvements in selection tools for AS are thus needed to correctly allocate men with PCa to AS, which will also reduce discontinuation due to conversion to active treatment without evidence of disease progression. Patient summary: Our assessment of a worldwide database of men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS) shows that 43.6% drop out of AS within 5 yr, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Better tools are needed to select and monitor men with PCa as part of AS.
|
|
