urologic oncology
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

413
(FIVE YEARS 102)

H-INDEX

23
(FIVE YEARS 3)

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 171
Author(s):  
Rossella Guerrieri ◽  
Lucrezia Rovati ◽  
Paolo Dell’Oglio ◽  
Antonio Galfano ◽  
Luca Ragazzoni ◽  
...  

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the destruction of routine hospital services globally, leading to an increase in the backlog of elective surgery cases. The aim of the study was to retrospectively investigate the pandemic’s impact on the urologic oncology surgical activity of a high-volume center located in Milan, Italy. The number and type of procedures performed in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic was evaluated using 2019 data as control. Waiting times for each surgical procedure were compared, on a bimonthly basis, between the two different years. Overall, a 26.7% reduction in the number of urologic oncology surgeries between 2019 and 2020 was observed (2019: 720, 2020: 528). Both the main indication for surgery and the type of procedure performed significantly differed between 2019 and 2020 (all p < 0.0001), with a decrease in the number of radical prostatectomies and an increase in the number of radical cystectomies and radical nephrectomies/nephroureterectomies performed in 2020. Waiting time decreased by 20% between 2019 and 2020, with the most significant reduction seen after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (July-October 2020), in particular for partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy, possibly due to the underdiagnosis of cases. In conclusion, in accordance with recommendations by international urological societies on prioritization strategies for oncological procedures, a higher proportion of surgeries for high-risk tumors was performed in 2020 at our center at the expense of procedures for lower risk diseases; however, future implications for patients’ prognosis still need to be determined.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Faris ◽  
Lindsey Herrel ◽  
James Montie ◽  
Stephanie Chisholm ◽  
Ashley Duby ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic led to delays in urologic cancer treatment. We sought the patient perspective on these delays. Methods We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory-sequential design. Survey findings are presented here. Patients from a Midwestern Comprehensive Cancer Center and the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network provided demographic and clinical data and responded to statements asking them to characterize their experience of treatment delay, patient-provider communication and coping strategies. We quantified patient distress with an ordinal scale (0-10), based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCN-DT). Results Forty-four consenting patients responded to the survey. Most were older than 61 years (77%) and male (66%). Their diagnoses included bladder (45%), prostate (30%) and kidney (20%) cancers. Median time since diagnosis was 6 months, 95% had plans for surgical treatment. Dominant reactions to treatment delay included fear that cancer would progress (50%) and relief at avoiding COVID-19 exposure (43%). Most patients reported feeling that their providers acknowledged their emotions (70%), yet 52% did not receive follow up phone calls and only 55% felt continually supported by their providers. Patients’ median distress level was 5/10 with 68% of patients reaching a clinically significant level of distress (≥4). Thematically grouped suggestions for providers included better communication (18%), more personalized support (14%), and better patient education (11%). Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, a high proportion of urologic cancer patients reached a clinically significant level of distress. While they felt concern from providers, they desired more engagement and personalized care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shankun Zhao ◽  
Peng Li ◽  
Weizhou Wu ◽  
Qinzhang Wang ◽  
Biao Qian ◽  
...  

AbstractFerroptosis, an iron-dependent form of non-apoptotic cell death, is believed to strongly contribute to the pathogenesis of multiple cancers. Recently, the positive association between ferroptosis and urologic malignancies has drawn considerable attention, while a comprehensive review focused on this issue is absent. Based on this review, ferroptosis has been implicated in the development and therapeutic responses of prostate cancer, kidney cancer, and bladder cancer. Mechanistically, a large number of biomolecules and tumor-associated signaling pathways, including DECR1, PANX2, HSPB1, ACOT8, SUV39H1, NCOA4, PI3K-AKT-mTOR signaling, VHL/HIF-2α pathway, and Hippo/TAZ signaling pathway, have been reported to regulate ferroptosis in urologic cancers. Ferroptosis inducers, such as erastin, ART, CPNPs, and quinazolinyl-arylurea derivatives, exert potential therapeutic effects per se and/or enhance the anticancer response of other anticancer drugs in urologic oncology. A better understanding of ferroptosis may provide a promising way to treat therapy-resistant urologic cancers.


Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Bersanelli ◽  
Giulia Mazzaschi ◽  
Patrizia Giannatempo ◽  
Daniele Raggi ◽  
Elena Farè ◽  
...  

Background: Few data are available regarding the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) patients. Methods: To provide a real-world experience with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-based therapy in UTUC patients, we involved an Italian network in a multicenter retrospective analysis. Results: A total of 78 UTUC patients were enrolled. The median follow-up was 25.1 months. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 2.2 months (95% CI 1.8–2.6), and the median OS (mOS) was 6.0 months (95% CI 3.6–8.4). The Sonpavde score (including performance status > 0, hemoglobin < 10 g/dl, liver metastases, time from prior chemotherapy ≥ 3 months) split the patients into three groups (0 vs 1 vs 2–4 factors), efficiently predicting the OS and PFS outcome at the multivariate analyses (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: The prognosis of unselected UTUC patients is still unsatisfactory. The Sonpavde score was validated for the first time in an UTUC population, as a useful tool for the treatment decision-making process.


2021 ◽  
pp. 201010582110552
Author(s):  
Alvin Yuanming Lee ◽  
Raj Tiwari ◽  
Shuhui Neo ◽  
Daanesh Huned ◽  
Arjunan Kumaran ◽  
...  

Introduction A multi-disciplinary approach has often been advocated to improve the delivery of oncological care, as compared to a mono-disciplinary and linear approach. Our study elucidates the clinical and patient-reported outcomes from a urologic-oncology multi-disciplinary team (MDT) clinic in a regional general hospital. Materials and Methods Patients who attended a uro-oncology MDT clinic which was started in January 2019 were identified. This service was specifically catered to patients who were histologically diagnosed with urological cancers. The MDT service comprised a multi-disciplinary tumour board followed by outpatient clinical consults with representatives from urology, medical and radiation oncology. Demographic variables, disease characteristics and treatment rendered were analysed. A survey was administered to assess patient satisfaction. Results Fifty patients with a median age of 70 years with complete case records were identified. The cancer types included prostate cancers (46%), urothelial cancers (26%) and renal cell carcinoma (12%) as the most frequent urological cancers. The median time from MDT to therapy initiation was 8 days. Among those with prostate, urothelial, renal and testicular malignancies, 71% (32/45) of our patients received treatment that were in accordance to guideline recommendations. A post-clinic survey showed that patients were satisfied with the information provided during the clinic and this also facilitated decision and time to initiation of therapy. Conclusion A multi-disciplinary service comprising a tumour board followed by a one-stop clinic provides patients with multi-disciplinary care, improved access to subsequent therapy, better time efficiency and high patient satisfaction scores. More studies are warranted to demonstrate its oncological outcomes.


Author(s):  
F. Gómez-Veiga ◽  
A. Alcaraz-Asensio ◽  
J.M. Burgos-Revilla ◽  
F.J. Cózar-Olmo

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Wake ◽  
Andrew B. Rosenkrantz ◽  
William C. Huang ◽  
James S. Wysock ◽  
Samir S. Taneja ◽  
...  

AbstractAugmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) are burgeoning technologies that have the potential to greatly enhance patient care. Visualizing patient-specific three-dimensional (3D) imaging data in these enhanced virtual environments may improve surgeons’ understanding of anatomy and surgical pathology, thereby allowing for improved surgical planning, superior intra-operative guidance, and ultimately improved patient care. It is important that radiologists are familiar with these technologies, especially since the number of institutions utilizing VR and AR is increasing. This article gives an overview of AR and VR and describes the workflow required to create anatomical 3D models for use in AR using the Microsoft HoloLens device. Case examples in urologic oncology (prostate cancer and renal cancer) are provided which depict how AR has been used to guide surgery at our institution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document