MO27-2 Risk factors for metastasis in prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND Screening for prostate cancer has long been a debated, complex topic. The use of risk calculators for prostate cancer is recommended for determining patients’ individual risk of cancer and the subsequent need for a prostate biopsy. These tools could lead to a better discrimination of patients in need of invasive diagnostic procedures and for optimized allocation of healthcare resources OBJECTIVE To systematically review available literature on current prostate cancer risk calculators’ performance in healthy population, by comparing the impact factor of individual items on different cohorts, and the models’ overall performance. METHODS We performed a systematic review of available prostate cancer risk calculators targeted at healthy population. We included studies published from January 2000 to March 2021 in English, Spanish, French, Portuguese or German. Two reviewers independently decided for or against inclusion based on abstracts. A third reviewer intervened in case of disagreements. From the selected titles, we extracted information regarding the purpose of the manuscript, the analyzed calculators, the population for which it was calibrated, the included risk factors, and the model’s overall accuracy. RESULTS We included a total of 18 calculators across 53 different manuscripts. The most commonly analyzed ones were they PCPT and ERSPC risk calculators, developed from North American and European cohorts, respectively. Both calculators provided high precision for the diagnosis of aggressive prostate cancer (AUC as high as 0.798 for PCPT and 0.91 for ERSPC). We found 9 calculators developed from scratch for specific populations, which reached diagnostic precisions as high as 0.938. The most commonly included risk factors in the calculators were age, PSA levels and digital rectal examination findings. Additional calculators included race and detailed personal and family history CONCLUSIONS Both the PCPR and the ERSPC risk calculators have been successfully adapted for cohorts other than the ones they were originally created for with no loss of diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, designing calculators from scratch considering each population’s sociocultural differences has resulted in risk tools that can be well adapted to be valid in more patients. The best risk calculator for prostate cancer will be that which was has been calibrated for its intended population and can be easily reproduced and implemented CLINICALTRIAL CRD42021242110

Download Full-text

Factors affecting health-related quality of life among prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice ◽

10.1177/1078155220959414 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 26 (8) ◽

pp. 1997-2010

Author(s):

Sharon Odeo ◽

Amsalu Degu

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Prostate Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Sexual Function ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Clinical Stage ◽

Treatment Modalities ◽

Functional Score ◽

Incidence And Mortality

Introduction Prostate cancer is recognized as the leading cause of malignancy-related incidence and mortality in the male population. The treatment regimens have long-term effects detrimental to the patient's quality of life. Hence, this review was aimed to determine the overall HRQOL and its associated among prostate cancer patients. Methods The review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cumulative Index to the Nursing and Allied Literature (CINAHL), which provided articles that were critically examined, yielding 52 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Results Out of 52 studies, 30 studies reported poor overall HRQOL in various domains after prostate cancer treatment. Contrastingly, 15 studies reported good overall quality of life after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer. Nonetheless, seven studies showed that the absence of a significant change in the overall quality of life after treatment. According to the studies, older age, comorbidities, higher clinical stage, higher Gleason score, greater cancer severity, African American race, impaired mental health, neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and lower level of education were the major poor predictors of HRQOL among prostate cancer patients. Conclusion The overall HRQOL in prostate cancer patients was generally poor in various functional domains after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer.

Download Full-text

Risk factors for neurocognitive decline in lung cancer patients treated with prophylactic cranial irradiation: A systematic review

Cancer Treatment Reviews ◽

10.1016/j.ctrv.2020.102025 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 88 ◽

pp. 102025 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Haiyan Zeng ◽

Lizza E.L. Hendriks ◽

Wouter H. van Geffen ◽

Willem J.A. Witlox ◽

Danielle B.P. Eekers ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Lung Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Cranial Irradiation ◽

Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation ◽

Lung Cancer Patients ◽

Neurocognitive Decline

Download Full-text

Does Gleason score of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence and oncological outcomes? Protocol for systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034612 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. e034612

Author(s):

Athul John ◽

Michael O'Callaghan ◽

Rick Catterwell ◽

Luke A Selth

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Radical Prostatectomy ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Gleason Score ◽

Biochemical Recurrence ◽

Surgical Margins ◽

Secondary Treatment ◽

Oncological Outcomes

IntroductionPositive surgical margins (PSM) in cancer patients are commonly associated with worse prognosis and a higher risk of secondary treatment. However, the relevance of this parameter in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial, given the inconsistencies in its ability to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) and oncological outcomes. Hence, further assessment of the utility of surgical margins for prostate cancer prognosis is required to predict these outcomes more accurately. Over the last decade, studies have used the Gleason score (GS) of positive margins to predict outcomes. Herein, the authors aim to conduct a systematic review investigating the role of GS of PSM after radical prostatectomy in predicting BCR and oncological outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will perform a search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and COCHRANE databases. The review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will screen titles and abstracts to select articles appropriate for full-text review. Studies discussing GS of PSM after RP will be included. Given the change in reporting of GS, only articles from 2005 to 2019 will be included. The quality of the studies chosen will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool for non-randomised and Cochrane risk of bias for randomised control studies. We will adopt the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation framework to comment on quality of cumulative evidence. The primary outcome measure will be time to BCR. Secondary outcome measures include secondary treatment, disease-specific survival, disease progression-free and overall mortality at follow-up period. We aim to perform a meta-analysis if the level of heterogeneity is acceptable (I2<50%).Ethics and disseminationThe review does not require ethics approval as it is a review of published literature. The findings of the review will be submitted for peer-reviewed publications and presented at scientific meetings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019131800.

Download Full-text