Search

Context: Treatment choice for localised prostate cancer remains a significant challenge for patients and clinicians, with uncertainty over decisions potentially leading to conflict and regret. There is a need to further understand the prevalence and prognostic factors of decision regret to improve patient quality of life., Objective: To generate the best estimates for the prevalence of significant decision regret localised prostate cancer patients, and to investigate prognostic patient, oncological, and treatment factors associated with regret., Evidence Acquisition: We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO databases including studies evaluating the prevalence or patient, treatment, or oncological prognostic factors in localised prostate cancer patients. A pooled prevalence of significant regret was calculated with the formal prognostic factor evaluation conducted per factor identified., Evidence Synthesis: Significant decision regret was present in a pooled 20% (95% confidence interval 16-23) of patients across 14 studies and 17883 patients. This was lower in active surveillance (13%), with little difference between those who underwent radiotherapy (19%) and those who underwent prostatectomy (18%). Evaluation of individual prognostic factors demonstrated higher regret in those with poorer post-treatment bowel, sexual, and urinary function; decreased involvement in the decision-making process; and Black ethnicity. However, evidence remains conflicting, with low or moderate certainty of findings., Conclusions: A significant proportion of men experience decision regret after a localised prostate cancer diagnosis. Monitoring those with increased functional symptoms and improving patient involvement in the decision-making process through education and decision aids may reduce regret., Patient Summary: We looked at how common regret in treatment decisions is after treatment for early-stage prostate cancer and factors linked with this. We found that one in five regret their decision, with those who had experienced side effects or were less involved in the decision-making process more likely to have regret. By addressing these, clinicians could reduce regret and improve quality of life., (Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Active surveillance (AS) is a management option for men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Opinions differ on whether it is safe to include young men (≤60 yr) or men with intermediate-risk disease., Objective: To assess whether reasons for discontinuation, treatment choice after AS, and adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy (RP; N1, or ≥GG3, or ≥pT3) differ for men ≤60 yr or those with European Association of Urology (EAU) intermediate-risk disease from those for men >60 yr or those with EAU low-risk disease., Design Setting and Participants: We analyzed data from 5411 men ≤60 yr and 14 959 men >60 yr, 14 064 men with low-risk cancer, and 2441 men with intermediate-risk cancer, originating from the GAP3 database (21 169 patients/27 cohorts worldwide)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Cumulative incidence curves were used to estimate the rates of AS discontinuation and treatment choice., Results and Limitations: The probability of discontinuation of AS due to disease progression at 5 yr was similar for men aged ≤60 yr (22%) and those >60 yr (25%), as well as those of any age with low-risk disease (24%) versus those with intermediate-risk disease (24%). Men with intermediate-risk disease are more prone to discontinue AS without evidence of progression than men with low-risk disease (at 1/5 yr: 5.9%/14.2% vs 2.0%/8.8%). Adverse pathology at RP was observed in 32% of men ≤60 yr compared with 36% of men >60 yr ( p  = 0.029), and in 34% with low-risk disease compared with 40% with intermediate-risk disease ( p  = 0.048)., Conclusions: Our descriptive analysis of AS practices worldwide showed that the risk of progression during AS is similar across the age and risk groups studied. The proportion of adverse pathology was higher among men >60 yr than among men ≤60 yr. These results suggest that men ≤60 yr and those with EAU intermediate-risk disease should not be excluded from opting for AS as initial management., Patient Summary: Data from 27 international centers reflecting daily clinical practice suggest that younger men or men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer do not hold greater risk for disease progression during active surveillance., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Background: Studies of active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (PCa) have focussed predominantly on Caucasian populations. Little is known about the experience of Asian men, while suitability for men of African descent has been questioned., Objective: To compare baseline characteristics, follow-up, and outcomes for men on AS for PCa, according to ethnicity., Design Setting and Participants: The study cohort included 13 centres from the GAP3 consortium that record ethnicity (categorised broadly as Caucasian/white, African/Afro-Caribbean/black, Asian, mixed/other, and unknown). Men with biopsy grade group >2, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >20 ng/ml, T stage ≥cT3, or age >80 yr were excluded., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Clinical characteristics, follow-up schedules, outcome status, and reasons for discontinuation were compared across ethnic groups. Risk of upgrading, potential disease progression (grade group ≥3 or T stage ≥3), suspicious indications (any upgrading, number of positive cores >3, T stage ≥cT3, PSA >20 ng/ml, or PSA density >0.2 ng/ml/cc 2 ), and conversion to treatment were assessed using mixed-effect regression models., Results and Limitations: The eligible cohort ( n = 9158) comprised 83% Caucasian men, 6% men of African descent, 5% Asian men, 2% men of mixed/other ethnicity, and 4% men of unknown ethnicity. Risks of suspicious indicators (hazard ratio = 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.45), upgrading (odds ratio [OR] = 1.40; 95% CI 1.14-1.71), and potential progression (OR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.06-2.01) were higher among African/black than among Caucasian/white men. Risk of transitioning to treatment did not differ by ethnicity. More Asian than Caucasian men converted without progression (42% vs 26%, p < 0.001). Heterogeneity in surveillance protocols and racial makeup limit interpretation., Conclusions: This multinational study found differences in the risk of disease progression and transitioning to treatment without signs of progression between ethnic groups. Further research is required to determine whether differences are due to biology, sociocultural factors, and/or clinical practice., Patient Summary: This international study compared prostate cancer active surveillance outcomes by ethnicity. Risks of upgrading and disease progression were higher among African than among Caucasian men. Transitioning to treatment without progression was highest among Asian men. Understanding of these differences requires further investigation., (© 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: Researchers remain divided on the major causes of dropout from active surveillance (AS), with rates of up to 38% among men with no evidence of prostate cancer (PC) progression., Objective: To develop and evaluate an educational intervention in terms of adherence to AS among men with low- to intermediate-risk PC., Design, Setting, and Participants: We first carried out focus group discussions with men who had remained on and dropped out of AS to inform an intervention to increase adherence to AS. A total of 255 consecutive men who had selected AS were then recruited to either standard care (written information and access to a nurse specialist) or standard care and the intervention., Intervention: An educational seminar was designed by patients and clinicians including information on imaging, biopsy techniques, understanding pathology, large AS cohorts - mortality and morbidity risk and diet and lifestyle advice., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The proportion of men dropping out of AS for reasons other than disease progression was assessed at 1 and 5yr after AS selection using multivariate logistic regression., Results and Limitations: Common themes influencing decision-making by men on AS were identified: (1) clinical consistency; (2) information; and (3) lifestyle advice. Addition of an educational seminar led to significantly fewer men dropping out of AS: at 1 and 5yr the dropout rate was 25% and 42%, respectively, in the standard care group, compared to 11% and 22% (p=0.001) in the intervention group. In the intervention group, 18 men failed to attend the seminar., Conclusions: The AS dropout rate was halved following a single educational seminar delivered to groups of men with intermediate- or low-risk PC, even at 5yr., Patient Summary: Men on active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer feel more supported when provided with an educational seminar within 3 mo of their treatment choice. The seminar halved the number of men dropping-out of AS, even at 5yr., (Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Context: Novel surgical techniques demand that surgical training adapts to the need for technical and nontechnical skills., Objective: To identify training methods available for robot-assisted surgical (RAS) training in urology, evaluate their effectiveness in terms of validation, educational impact, acceptability, and cost effectiveness, and assess their effect on learning curves (LCs)., Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines searched Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library. Results were screened to include appropriate studies. Quality was evaluated. Each method was evaluated, and conclusions were drawn regarding LCs., Evidence Synthesis: Of 359 records, 24 were included (521 participants). Training methods included dry-lab training (n=7), wet-lab training (n=7), mentored training (n=7), and nonstructured pathways (n=5). Dry-lab training demonstrated educational impact by reducing console time and was acceptable in a study; 100% of participants confirmed face validity. Wet-lab training principally uses human cadaveric material; effectiveness is well rated, although dry-lab training and observation were rated as equally useful. Mentored programmes combine lectures, tutorials, observation, simulation, and proctoring. Minifellowships were linked to greater practice of RAS 1 yr later. LCs vary according to experience. One study found that surgeons from robot-related fellowships demonstrated fewer positive surgical margins than surgeons from laparoscopic-related fellowships (24% vs 34.6%; p=0.05) and reduced time (132 vs 152min; p=0.0003). Five studies examined nonstructured training pathways (clinical practice). Experience correlated with fewer complications (p=0.007), improved continence (p=0.049), and reduced time (p=0.002)., Conclusions: RAS training methods include dry and wet lab, mentored training, and nonstructured pathways. Limited available evidence suggests that they affect LCs differently and are rarely used alone. The different methods of training appear effective when combined. Their benefits must be explored to facilitate validated acceptable training with educational impact., Patient Summary: Robot-assisted training encompasses several methods used in combination, but more evidence is required to gain the greatest benefit and formulate future training pathways., (Copyright © 2016 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)