Refine
Document Type
- Article (17)
Language
- English (17)
Has Fulltext
- yes (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (17)
Keywords
- 177Lu-PSMA-617 (2)
- Adenocarcinoma (2)
- Bladder cancer (2)
- CSM (2)
- Cancer-specific mortality (2)
- MIBC (2)
- Melanoma (2)
- Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (2)
- Metastatic prostate cancer (2)
- PSMA (2)
Institute
- Medizin (17)
Purpose: To compare Cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in patients with Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) vs. non-SCC penile cancer, since survival outcomes may differ between histological subtypes. Methods: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database (2004–2016), penile cancer patients of all stages were identified. Temporal trend analyses, cumulative incidence and Kaplan–Meier plots, multivariable Cox regression and Fine and Gray competing-risks regression analyses tested for CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC penile cancer patients. Results: Of 4,120 eligible penile cancer patients, 123 (3%) harbored non-SCC vs. 4,027 (97%) SCC. Of all non-SCC patients, 51 (41%) harbored melanomas, 42 (34%) basal cell carcinomas, 10 (8%) adenocarcinomas, eight (6.5%) skin appendage malignancies, six (5%) epithelial cell neoplasms, two (1.5%) neuroendocrine tumors, two (1.5%) lymphomas, two (1.5%) sarcomas. Stage at presentation differed between non-SCC vs. SCC. In temporal trend analyses, non-SCC diagnoses neither decreased nor increased over time (p > 0.05). After stratification according to localized, locally advanced, and metastatic stage, no CSM differences were observed between non-SCC vs. SCC, with 5-year survival rates of 11 vs 11% (p = 0.9) for localized, 33 vs. 37% (p = 0.4) for locally advanced, and 1-year survival rates of 37 vs. 53% (p = 0.9) for metastatic penile cancer, respectively. After propensity score matching for patient and tumor characteristics and additional multivariable adjustment, no CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC were observed. Conclusion: Non-SCC penile cancer is rare. Although exceptions exist, on average, non-SCC penile cancer has comparable CSM as SCC penile cancer patients, after stratification for localized, locally invasive, and metastatic disease.
Purpose: To compare Cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in patients with Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) vs. non-SCC penile cancer, since survival outcomes may differ between histological subtypes. Methods: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database (2004–2016), penile cancer patients of all stages were identified. Temporal trend analyses, cumulative incidence and Kaplan–Meier plots, multivariable Cox regression and Fine and Gray competing-risks regression analyses tested for CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC penile cancer patients. Results: Of 4,120 eligible penile cancer patients, 123 (3%) harbored non-SCC vs. 4,027 (97%) SCC. Of all non-SCC patients, 51 (41%) harbored melanomas, 42 (34%) basal cell carcinomas, 10 (8%) adenocarcinomas, eight (6.5%) skin appendage malignancies, six (5%) epithelial cell neoplasms, two (1.5%) neuroendocrine tumors, two (1.5%) lymphomas, two (1.5%) sarcomas. Stage at presentation differed between non-SCC vs. SCC. In temporal trend analyses, non-SCC diagnoses neither decreased nor increased over time (p > 0.05). After stratification according to localized, locally advanced, and metastatic stage, no CSM differences were observed between non-SCC vs. SCC, with 5-year survival rates of 11 vs 11% (p = 0.9) for localized, 33 vs. 37% (p = 0.4) for locally advanced, and 1-year survival rates of 37 vs. 53% (p = 0.9) for metastatic penile cancer, respectively. After propensity score matching for patient and tumor characteristics and additional multivariable adjustment, no CSM differences between non-SCC vs. SCC were observed. Conclusion: Non-SCC penile cancer is rare. Although exceptions exist, on average, non-SCC penile cancer has comparable CSM as SCC penile cancer patients, after stratification for localized, locally invasive, and metastatic disease.
Background: To analyze postoperative, in-hospital, complication rates in patients with organ transplantation before radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: From National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2000–2015) prostate cancer patients treated with RP were abstracted and stratified according to prior organ transplant versus nontransplant. Multivariable logistic regression models predicted in-hospital complications. Results: Of all eligible 202,419 RP patients, 216 (0.1%) underwent RP after prior organ transplantation. Transplant RP patients exhibited higher proportions of Charlson comorbidity index ≥2 (13.0% vs. 3.0%), obesity (9.3% vs. 5.6%, both p < 0.05), versus to nontransplant RP. Of transplant RP patients, 96 underwent kidney (44.4%), 44 heart (20.4%), 40 liver (18.5%), 30 (13.9%) bone marrow, <11 lung (<5%), and <11 pancreatic (<5%) transplantation before RP. Within transplant RP patients, rates of lymph node dissection ranged from 37.5% (kidney transplant) to 60.0% (bone marrow transplant, p < 0.01) versus 51% in nontransplant patients. Regarding in-hospital complications, transplant patients more frequently exhibited, diabetic (31.5% vs. 11.6%, p < 0.001), major (7.9% vs. 2.9%) cardiac complications (3.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.01), and acute kidney failure (5.1% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001), versus nontransplant RP. In multivariable logistic regression models, transplant RP patients were at higher risk of acute kidney failure (odds ratio [OR]: 4.83), diabetic (OR: 2.81), major (OR: 2.39), intraoperative (OR: 2.38), cardiac (OR: 2.16), transfusion (OR: 1.37), and overall complications (1.36, all p < 0.001). No in-hospital mortalities were recorded in transplant patients after RP. Conclusions: Of all transplants before RP, kidney ranks first. RP patients with prior transplantation have an increased risk of in-hospital complications. The highest risk, relative to nontransplant RP patients appears to acute kidney failure.
Purpose: We evaluated efficacy and safety profile of patients with anticoagulation therapy (AT) undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).
Methods: Within our prospective institutional database (11/2017 to 11/2019), we analyzed functional outcomes and 30-day complication rates of HoLEP patients according to Clavien–Dindo classification (CLD), stratified according to specific AT vs. no AT. Further analyses consisted of uni- and multivariate logistic regression models (LRM) predicting complications.
Results: Of 268 patients undergoing HoLEP, 104 (38.8%) received AT: 25.7% were treated with platelet aggregation inhibitors (PAI), 8.2% with new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and 4.9% with AT-combinations or coumarins bridged with low molecular weight heparins (LMWH/combination). Patients receiving AT were significantly more comorbid (p < 0.01). Pre- and postoperative maximal flow rates, residual void urine and IPSS at 3 months after surgery were invariably improved after HoLEP for patients with/ without AT. Overall complication rate was 19.5% in patients with no AT vs. 26.1% vs. 27.3 vs. 46.2%, respectively, in patients with PAI, NOAC and LMWH/combination (p < 0.01). Major complications (CLD ≥ 3b) occurred in 6.1% of no AT patients vs. 4.3% vs. 4.5 vs. 0% in patients with PAI, NOAC and LMWH/combination, respectively (p < 0.01). In multivariate LRM, AT was not significantly associated with higher complication rates, whereas high ASA status (OR 2.2, p = 0.04), age (OR 1.04, p = 0.02) and bioptical or incidental prostate cancer (OR 2.5, p = 0.01) represented independent risk factors.
Conclusion: Despite higher overall complication rates in AT patients, major complications were not more frequent in AT patients. HoLEP is safe and effective in anticoagulated patients.
Background: To evaluate the impact of time to castration resistance (TTCR) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) patients on overall survival (OS) in the era of combination therapies for mHSPC.
Material and Methods: Of 213 mHSPC patients diagnosed between 01/2013-12/2020 who subsequently developed metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), 204 eligible patients were analyzed after having applied exclusion criteria. mHSPC patients were classified into TTCR <12, 12-18, 18-24, and >24 months and analyzed regarding OS. Moreover, further OS analyses were performed after having developed mCRPC status according to TTCR. Logistic regression models predicted the value of TTCR on OS.
Results: Median follow-up was 34 months. Among 204 mHSPC patients, 41.2% harbored TTCR <12 months, 18.1% for 12-18 months, 15.2% for 18-24 months, and 25.5% for >24 months. Median age was 67 years and median PSA at prostate cancer diagnosis was 61 ng/ml. No differences in patient characteristics were observed (all p>0.05). According to OS, TTCR <12 months patients had the worst OS, followed by TTCR 12-18 months, 18-24 months, and >24 months, in that order (p<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, a 4.07-, 3.31-, and 6.40-fold higher mortality was observed for TTCR 18-24 months, 12-18 months, and <12 months patients, relative to TTCR >24 months (all p<0.05). Conversely, OS after development of mCRPC was not influenced by TTCR stratification (all p>0.05).
Conclusion: Patients with TTCR <12 months are at the highest OS disadvantage in mHSPC. This OS disadvantage persisted even after multivariable adjustment. Interestingly, TTCR stratified analyses did not influence OS in mCRPC patients.
Probably, patients with de novo (synchronous) and recurrent (metachronous) oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer have different oncologic outcomes. Thus, we are challenged with different scenarios in clinical practice, where different treatment options may apply. In the last years, several prospective studies have focused on the treatment of patients with de novo oligometastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Not only the addition of systemic therapeutic treatments, such as chemotherapy with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide, next to androgen deprivation therapy, demonstrated to improve outcomes in these patients but also local therapy of the primary has been demonstrated to improve outcomes of low-volume metastatic disease. Next to radiotherapy, also radical prostatectomy has been reported as a feasible and safe treatment option. Additional metastasis-directed therapy in de novo metastatic disease is currently examined by four trials. In the recurrent metastatic setting, less data are available, and it remains uncertain if patients can be treated in the same way as synchronous oligometastatic disease. Metastasis-directed therapy has demonstrated to prolong outcomes, while data on survival are still missing.
Introduction and Objective: Identifying patients that benefit from cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is a major issue in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The purpose of this study is to correlate “luminal” and “basal” type protein expression with histological subtypes, to investigate the prognostic impact on survival after adjuvant chemotherapy and to define molecular consensus subtypes of “double negative” patients (i.e., without expression of CK5/6 or GATA3).
Materials and Methods: We performed immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of CK5/6 and GATA3 for surrogate molecular subtyping in 181 MIBC samples. The mRNA expression profiles for molecular consensus classification were determined in CK5/6 and GATA3 (double) negative cases using a transcriptome panel with 19.398 mRNA targets (HTG Molecular Diagnostics). Data of 110 patients undergoing radical cystectomy were available for survival analysis.
Results: The expression of CK5/6 correlated with squamous histological subtype (96%) and expression of GATA3 was associated with micropapillary histology (100%). In the multivariate Cox-regression model, patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy had a significant survival benefit (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.19 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1–0.4, p < 0.001) and double-negative cases had decreased OS (HR: 4.07; 95% CI: 1.5–10.9, p = 0.005). Double negative cases were classified as NE-like (30%), stroma-rich (30%), and Ba/Sq (40%) consensus molecular subtypes and displaying different histological subtypes.
Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented expansion of telemedicine services worldwide. This study aimed to explore the practice of telemedicine in Pediatric Surgery in Germany, the impact of the pandemic on its development and parents’ and surgeons’ experiences with telemedicine.
Methods: The study is a cross-sectional analysis using three surveys between 6/2020 and 10/2020: (1) all Pediatric Surgery departments of Germany reported whether they provide telemedicine services. (2) Members of the German Society of Pediatric Surgery and (3) families who participated in an outpatient visit by telephone or video with the Department of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Urology of the University Hospital Frankfurt completed an anonymous survey on their experience with telemedicine.
Results: 21% of the Pediatric Surgery departments in Germany provided telemedicine, of which 57% started due to the pandemic. The lack of physical examination and face-to-face contact seem to be the major limitations to surgeons and parents. 48% of the parents answered that telemedicine is equal to or better than traditional appointments, while 33% thought that telemedicine is worse.
Conclusions: This study shows that families and doctors alike have had positive experiences with telemedicine and most will continue to use this format after the pandemic.
Background: Myelosuppression is a potential dose-limiting factor in radioligand therapy (RLT). This study aims to investigate occurrence, severity and reversibility of hematotoxic adverse events in patients undergoing RLT with 177Lu-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The contribution of pretreatment risk factors and cumulative treatment activity is taken into account specifically. Methods: RLT was performed in 140 patients receiving a total of 497 cycles. A mean activity of 6.9 ± 1.3 GBq 177Lu-PSMA-617 per cycle was administered, and mean cumulative activity was 24.6 ± 15.9 GBq. Hematological parameters were measured at baseline, prior to each treatment course, 2 to 4 weeks thereafter and throughout follow-up. Toxicity was graded based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Results: Significant (grade ≥ 3) hematologic adverse events occurred in 13 (9.3%) patients, with anemia in 10 (7.1%), leukopenia in 5 (3.6%) and thrombocytopenia in 6 (4.3%). Hematotoxicity was reversible to grade ≤ 2 through a median follow-up of 8 (IQR 9) months in all but two patients who died from disease progression within less than 3 months after RLT. Myelosuppression was significantly more frequent in patients with pre-existing grade 2 cytopenia (OR: 3.50, 95%CI 1.08–11.32, p = 0.04) or high bone tumor burden (disseminated or diffuse based on PROMISE miTNM, OR: 5.08, 95%CI 1.08–23.86, p = 0.04). Previous taxane-based chemotherapy was associated with an increased incidence of significant hematotoxicity (OR: 4.62, 95%CI 1.23–17.28, p = 0.02), while treatment with 223Ra-dichloride, cumulative RLT treatment activity and activity per cycle were not significantly correlated (p = 0.93, 0.33, 0.29). Conclusion: Hematologic adverse events after RLT have an acceptable overall incidence and are frequently reversible. High bone tumor burden, previous taxane-based chemotherapy and pretreatment grade 2 cytopenia may be considered as risk factors for developing clinically relevant myelosuppression, whereas cumulative RLT activity and previous 223Ra-dichloride treatment show no significant contribution to incidence rates.
The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome of patients with metastasized castration-resistant early-onset prostate cancer refractory to chemotherapy receiving radioligand therapy with 177Lutetium-PSMA-617 (LuPSMA-RLT). Twenty-five patients of ≤55 years of age at prostate cancer diagnosis, treated with a median of four (IQR 2–6) cycles (mean of 7.7 ± 1.4 GBq per cycle) every 6–8 weeks, were analyzed. Survival outcome was calculated based on the Kaplan–Meier method. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.8 months (95% CI 2.3–5.3), and overall survival (OS) was 8.5 months (95% CI 6.2–10.8). An initial PSA reduction (≥ 50%) was observed in 9/25 (36%) of patients without being significantly associated with OS (p = 0.601). PSA response (PSA decline ≥50% at 12 weeks) was observed in 12/25 (48%) of patients and significantly associated with longer OS (16.0 months, 95% CI 7.4–24.6 vs. 4.0 months, 95% CI 1.1–6.9, p = 0.002). Imaging-based response using 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET/CT after two to three cycles was seen in 11/25 (44%). Additionally, responders had a significantly longer median PFS (8.7 months, 95% CI 1.3–16.1 vs. 1.9 months, 95% CI 1.7–2.2, p < 0.001) and OS (16.0 months, 95% CI 7.6–24.4 vs. 4.0 months, 95% CI 0.9–7.1; p = 0.002). Intra- or post-therapeutic toxicity was graded according to the CTCAE v5.0 criteria. Newly developing grade ≥ 3 anemia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in three (12%), one (4%), and three (12%) patients, respectively. One patient showed renal toxicity (grade ≥ 3) during follow-up. Pain palliation (>2 level VAS decline) was achieved in 9/14 (64%) and performance status improvement (ECOG level decline ≥ 1) in 8/17 (47%) of patients. Compared to previous reports, radioligand therapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617 in metastasized castration-resistant early-onset prostate cancer patients refractory to chemotherapy yields similar response rates with a comparable safety profile, but is associated with shorter survival.
