Kevin B Ginsburg1, Gannon L Curtis1, Ryan E Timar2, Arvin K George3, Michael L Cher4. 1. Department of Urology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. 2. Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan. 3. Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The 2019 novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has forced many health care organizations to divert efforts and resources to emergent patient care, delaying many elective oncologic surgeries. We investigated an association between delay in radical prostatectomy and oncologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer in the National Cancer Database undergoing radical prostatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Immediate radical prostatectomy was defined as radical prostatectomy within 3 months of diagnosis, while delayed radical prostatectomy was analyzed in 3-month intervals up to 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to test for associations between levels of delayed radical prostatectomy and outcomes of interest (adverse pathology, upgrading on radical prostatectomy, node positive disease and post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments) compared with men undergoing immediate radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: We identified 128,062 men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. After adjustment, we did not appreciate a significant difference in odds of adverse pathology, upgrading, node positive disease or post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments between men treated with immediate radical prostatectomy and any level of delay up to 12 months. Subgroup analysis of men with Grade Group 4 and 5 prostate cancer did not demonstrate an association between delayed radical prostatectomy and worse oncologic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In the National Cancer Database delayed radical prostatectomy was not associated with early adverse oncologic outcomes at radical prostatectomy. These results may provide reassurance to patients and urologists balancing care in the current pandemic.
PURPOSE: The 2019 novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has forced many health care organizations to divert efforts and resources to emergent patient care, delaying many elective oncologic surgeries. We investigated an association between delay in radical prostatectomy and oncologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer in the National Cancer Database undergoing radical prostatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Immediate radical prostatectomy was defined as radical prostatectomy within 3 months of diagnosis, while delayed radical prostatectomy was analyzed in 3-month intervals up to 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to test for associations between levels of delayed radical prostatectomy and outcomes of interest (adverse pathology, upgrading on radical prostatectomy, node positive disease and post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments) compared with men undergoing immediate radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: We identified 128,062 men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. After adjustment, we did not appreciate a significant difference in odds of adverse pathology, upgrading, node positive disease or post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments between men treated with immediate radical prostatectomy and any level of delay up to 12 months. Subgroup analysis of men with Grade Group 4 and 5 prostate cancer did not demonstrate an association between delayed radical prostatectomy and worse oncologic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In the National Cancer Database delayed radical prostatectomy was not associated with early adverse oncologic outcomes at radical prostatectomy. These results may provide reassurance to patients and urologists balancing care in the current pandemic.
Authors: Maria J Monroy-Iglesias; Sonpreet Rai; Francesco A Mistretta; Graham Roberts; Harvey Dickinson; Beth Russell; Charlotte Moss; Rita De Berardinis; Matteo Ferro; Gennaro Musi; Christian Brown; Rajesh Nair; Ramesh Thurairaja; Archana Fernando; Paul Cathcart; Azhar Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Sachin Malde; Marios Hadijpavlou; Saoirse Dolly; Kate Haire; Marta Tagliabue; Ottavio de Cobelli; Ben Challacombe; Mieke Van Hemelrijck Journal: BJUI Compass Date: 2022-01-27
Authors: Sarah S Lee; Danial Ceasar; Benjamin Margolis; Pooja Venkatesh; Kevin Espino; Deanna Gerber; Leslie R Boyd Journal: Gynecol Oncol Rep Date: 2022-05-10
Authors: Francisco A Montiel Ishino; Claire Rowan; Rina Das; Janani Thapa; Ewan Cobran; Martin Whiteside; Faustine Williams Journal: Am J Mens Health Date: 2020 Nov-Dec
Authors: Arnav Srivastava; Hiren V Patel; Sinae Kim; Brian Shinder; Joshua Sterling; Alexandra L Tabakin; Charles F Polotti; Biren Saraiya; Tina Mayer; Isaac Y Kim; Saum Ghodoussipour; Hiten D Patel; Thomas L Jang; Eric A Singer Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Ekaterina Laukhtina; Reza Sari Motlagh; Keiichiro Mori; Fahad Quhal; Victor M Schuettfort; Hadi Mostafaei; Satoshi Katayama; Nico C Grossmann; Guillaume Ploussard; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Alberto Briganti; Mohammad Abufaraj; Dmitry Enikeev; Benjamin Pradere; Shahrokh F Shariat Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 4.226