Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:markad01
Urologists' perceptions and practices related to patient smoking and cessation: a national assessment from the 2021 American Urological Association Census
Matulewicz, Richard S; Meeks, William; Mbassa, Rachel; Fang, Raymond; Pittman, Ashley; Mossanen, Matthew; Furberg, Helena; Chichester, Lou-Anne; Lui, Michelle; Sherman, Scott E; Makarov, Danil V; Bjurlin, Marc A; Ostroff, Jamie S
OBJECTIVE:To assess urologists' perceptions and practices related to smoking and smoking cessation. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Six survey questions were designed to assess beliefs, practices, and determinants related to tobacco use assessment and treatment (TUAT) in outpatient urology clinics. These questions were included in an annual census survey (2021) offered to all practicing urologists. Responses were weighted to represent the practicing US population of nonpediatric urologists (N=12,852). The primary outcome was affirmative responses to the question, "Do you agree it is important for urologists to screen for and provide smoking cessation treatment to patients in the outpatient clinic?" Practice patterns, perceptions, and opinions of optimal care delivery were assessed. RESULTS:In total, 98% of urologists agreed (27%) or strongly agreed (71%) that cigarette smoking is a significant contributor to urologic disease. However, only 58% agreed that TUAT is important in urology clinics. Most urologists (61%) advise patients who smoke to quit but do not provide additional cessation counseling or medications or arrange follow-up. The most frequently identified barriers to TUAT were lack of time (70%), perceptions that patients are unwilling to quit (44%), and lack of comfort prescribing cessation medications (42%). Additionally, 72% of respondents stated that urologists should provide a recommendation to quit and refer patients for cessation support. CONCLUSIONS:TUAT does not routinely occur in an evidence-based fashion in outpatient urology clinics. Addressing established barriers and facilitating these practices with multilevel implementation strategies can promote tobacco treatment and improve outcomes for patients with urologic disease.
PMID: 37422137
ISSN: 1527-9995
CID: 5539592
Single-cell analysis of localized prostate cancer patients links high Gleason score with an immunosuppressive profile
Adorno Febles, Victor R; Hao, Yuan; Ahsan, Aarif; Wu, Jiansheng; Qian, Yingzhi; Zhong, Hua; Loeb, Stacy; Makarov, Danil V; Lepor, Herbert; Wysock, James; Taneja, Samir S; Huang, William C; Becker, Daniel J; Balar, Arjun V; Melamed, Jonathan; Deng, Fang-Ming; Ren, Qinghu; Kufe, Donald; Wong, Kwok-Kin; Adeegbe, Dennis O; Deng, Jiehui; Wise, David R
BACKGROUND:Evading immune surveillance is a hallmark for the development of multiple cancer types. Whether immune evasion contributes to the pathogenesis of high-grade prostate cancer (HGPCa) remains an area of active inquiry. METHODS:Through single-cell RNA sequencing and multicolor flow cytometry of freshly isolated prostatectomy specimens and matched peripheral blood, we aimed to characterize the tumor immune microenvironment (TME) of localized prostate cancer (PCa), including HGPCa and low-grade prostate cancer (LGPCa). RESULTS: TILs. The PCa TME was infiltrated by macrophages but these did not clearly cluster by M1 and M2 markers. CONCLUSIONS:T cell exhaustion in localized PCa, a finding enriched in HGPCa relative to LGPCa. These studies suggest a possible link between the clinical-pathologic risk of PCa and the associated TME. Our results have implications for our understanding of the immunologic mechanisms of PCa pathogenesis and the implementation of immunotherapy for localized PCa.
PMID: 36988342
ISSN: 1097-0045
CID: 5463282
Veterans Health Administration National TeleOncology Service
Zullig, Leah L; Raska, Whitney; McWhirter, Gina; Sherman, Scott E; Makarov, Danil; Becker, Daniel; King, Heather A; Pura, John; Jeffreys, Amy S; Danus, Susanne; Passero, Vida; Goldstein, Karen M; Kelley, Michael J
PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:As the largest integrated health care system in the United States, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) is a leader in telehealth-delivered care. All 10 million Veterans cared for within the VA are eligible for telehealth. The VA cares for approximately 46,000 Veteran patients with newly diagnosed cancer and an estimated 400,000 prevalent cases annually. With nearly 38% of VA health care system users residing in rural areas and only 44% of rural counties having an oncologist, many Veterans lack local access to specialized cancer services. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We describe the VA's National TeleOncology (NTO) Service. NTO was established to provide Veterans with the opportunity for specialized treatment regardless of geographical location. Designed as a hub-and-spoke model, VA oncologists from across the country can provide care to patients at spoke sites. Spoke sites are smaller and rural VA medical centers that are less able to independently provide the full range of services available at larger facilities. In addition to smaller rural spoke sites, NTO also provides subspecialized oncology care to Veterans located in larger VA medical facilities that do not have subspecialties available or that have limited capacity. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:As of fiscal year 2021, 23 clinics are served by or engaged in planning for delivery of NTO and there are 24 physicians providing care through the NTO virtual hub. Most NTO physicians continue to provide patient care in separate traditional in-person clinics. Approximately 4,300 unique Veterans have used NTO services. Approximately half (52%) of Veterans using NTO lived in rural areas. Most of these Veterans had more than one remote visit through NTO. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:NTO is a state-of-the-art model that has the potential to revolutionize the way cancer care is delivered, which should improve the experience of Veterans receiving cancer care.
PMCID:10113113
PMID: 36649579
ISSN: 2688-1535
CID: 5462132
Time Trends and Variation in the Use of Active Surveillance for Management of Low-risk Prostate Cancer in the US
Cooperberg, Matthew R; Meeks, William; Fang, Raymond; Gaylis, Franklin D; Catalona, William J; Makarov, Danil V
IMPORTANCE:Active surveillance (AS) is endorsed by clinical guidelines as the preferred management strategy for low-risk prostate cancer, but its use in contemporary clinical practice remains incompletely defined. OBJECTIVE:To characterize trends over time and practice- and practitioner-level variation in the use of AS in a large, national disease registry. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort study included men with low-risk prostate cancer, defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) less than 10 ng/mL, Gleason grade group 1, and clinical stage T1c or T2a, newly diagnosed between January 1, 2014, and June 1, 2021. Patients were identified in the American Urological Association (AUA) Quality (AQUA) Registry, a large quality reporting registry including data from 1945 urology practitioners at 349 practices across 48 US states and territories, comprising more than 8.5 million unique patients. Data are collected automatically from electronic health record systems at participating practices. EXPOSURES:Exposures of interest included patient age, race, and PSA level, as well as urology practice and individual urology practitioners. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:The outcome of interest was the use of AS as primary treatment. Treatment was determined through analysis of electronic health record structured and unstructured clinical data and determination of surveillance based on follow-up testing with at least 1 PSA level remaining greater than 1.0 ng/mL. RESULTS:A total of 20 809 patients in AQUA were diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer and had known primary treatment. The median age was 65 (IQR, 59-70) years; 31 (0.1%) were American Indian or Alaska Native; 148 (0.7%) were Asian or Pacific Islander; 1855 (8.9%) were Black; 8351 (40.1%) were White; 169 (0.8%) were of other race or ethnicity; and 10 255 (49.3%) were missing information on race or ethnicity. Rates of AS increased sharply and consistently from 26.5% in 2014 to 59.6% in 2021. However, use of AS varied from 4.0% to 78.0% at the urology practice level and from 0% to 100% at the practitioner level. On multivariable analysis, year of diagnosis was the variable most strongly associated with AS; age, race, and PSA value at diagnosis were all also associated with odds of surveillance. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:This cohort study of AS rates in the AQUA Registry found that national, community-based rates of AS have increased but remain suboptimal, and wide variation persists across practices and practitioners. Continued progress on this critical quality indicator is essential to minimize overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer and by extension to improve the benefit-to-harm ratio of national prostate cancer early detection efforts.
PMID: 36862409
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5738002
Understanding the Role of Urology Practice Organization and Racial Composition in Prostate Cancer Treatment Disparities
Agochukwu-Mmonu, Nnenaya; Qin, Yongmei; Kaufman, Samuel; Oerline, Mary; Vince, Randy; Makarov, Danil; Caram, Megan V; Chapman, Christina; Ravenell, Joseph; Hollenbeck, Brent K; Skolarus, Ted A
PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:Black men have a higher risk of prostate cancer diagnosis and mortality but are less likely to receive definitive treatment. The impact of structural aspects on treatment is unknown but may lead to actionable insights to mitigate disparities. We sought to examine the associations between urology practice organization and racial composition and treatment patterns for Medicare beneficiaries with incident prostate cancer. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Using a 20% sample of national Medicare data, we identified beneficiaries diagnosed with prostate cancer between January 2010 and December 2015 and followed them through 2016. We linked urologists to their practices with tax identification numbers. We then linked patients to practices on the basis of their primary urologist. We grouped practices into quartiles on the basis of their proportion of Black patients. We used multilevel mixed-effects models to identify treatment associations. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:< .05). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Despite Medicare coverage, we found less definitive treatment among Black beneficiaries consistent with ongoing prostate cancer treatment disparities. Our findings are reflective of the adverse effects of practice segregation and structural racism, highlighting the need for multilevel interventions.
PMID: 36657098
ISSN: 2688-1535
CID: 5419222
A Study to Compare a CHW-Led Versus Physician-Led Intervention for Prostate Cancer Screening Decision-Making among Black Men
Martinez-Lopez, Natalia; Makarov, Danil V; Thomas, Jerry; Ciprut, Shannon; Hickman, Theodore; Cole, Helen; Fenstermaker, Michael; Gold, Heather; Loeb, Stacy; Ravenell, Joseph E
INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men in the United States and harms Black men disproportionately. Most US men are uninformed about many key facts important to make an informed decision about prostate cancer. Most experts agree that it is important for men to learn about these problems as early as possible in their lifetime. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To compare the effect of a community health worker (CHW)-led educational session with a physician-led educational session that counsels Black men about the risks and benefits of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:One hundred eighteen Black men recruited in 8 community-based settings attended a prostate cancer screening education session led by either a CHW or a physician. Participants completed surveys before and after the session to assess knowledge, decisional conflict, and perceptions about the intervention. Both arms used a decision aid that explains the benefits, risks, and controversies of PSA screening and decision coaching. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:There was no significant difference in decisional conflict change by group: 24.31 physician led versus 30.64 CHW led (P=.31). The CHW-led group showed significantly greater improvement on knowledge after intervention, change (SD): 2.6 (2.81) versus 5.1 (3.19), P<.001). However, those in the physician-led group were more likely to agree that the speaker knew a lot about PSA testing (P<.001) and were more likely to trust the speaker (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:CHW-led interventions can effectively assist Black men with complex health decision-making in community-based settings. This approach may improve prostate cancer knowledge and equally minimize decisional conflict compared with a physician-led intervention.
PMCID:11152150
PMID: 38846259
ISSN: 1945-0826
CID: 5669882
An Evaluation of a Web-Based Decision Aid for Treatment Planning of Small Kidney Tumors: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Fogarty, Justin; Siriruchatanon, Mutita; Makarov, Danil; Langford, Aisha; Kang, Stella
BACKGROUND:Surgery is the most common treatment for localized small kidney masses (SKMs) up to 4 cm, despite a lack of evidence for improved overall survival. Nonsurgical management options are gaining recognition, as evidence supports the indolence of most SKMs. Decision aids (DAs) have been shown to improve patient comprehension of the trade-offs of treatment options and overall decision quality, and may improve consideration of all major options according to individual health priorities and preferences. OBJECTIVE:This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) primarily aims to evaluate the impact of a new web-based DA on treatment decisions for patients with SKM; that is, selection of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment options. Secondary objectives include an assessment of decision-making outcomes: decisional conflict, decision satisfaction, and an understanding of individual preferences for treatment that incorporate the trade-offs associated with surgical versus nonsurgical interventions. METHODS:Three phases comprise the construction and evaluation of a new web-based DA on SKM treatment. In phase 1, this DA was developed in print format through a multidisciplinary design committee incorporating patient focus groups. Phase 2 was an observational study on patient knowledge and decision-making measures after randomization to receive the printed DA or institutional educational materials, which identified further educational needs applied to a web-based DA. Phase 3 will preliminarily evaluate the web-based DA: in a pilot RCT, 50 adults diagnosed with SKMs will receive the web-based DA or an existing web-based institutional website at urology clinics at a large academic medical center. The web-based DA applies risk communication and information about diagnosis and treatment options, elicits preferences regarding treatment options, and provides a set of options to consider with their doctor based on a decision-analytic model of benefits/harm analysis that accounts for comorbidity, age group, and tumor features. Questionnaires and treatment decision data will be gathered before and after viewing the educational material. RESULTS:This phase will consist of a pilot RCT from August 2022 to January 2023 to establish feasibility and preliminarily evaluate decision outcomes. Previous study phases from 2018 to 2020 supported the feasibility of providing the printed DA in urology clinics before clinical consultation and demonstrated increased patient knowledge about the diagnosis and treatment options and greater likelihood of favoring nonsurgical treatment just before consultation. This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute. Recruitment will begin in August 2022. CONCLUSIONS:A web-based DA has been designed to address educational needs for patients making treatment decisions for SKM, accounting for comorbidities and treatment-related benefits and risks. Outcomes from the pilot trial will evaluate the potential of a web-based DA in personalizing treatment decisions and in helping patients weigh attributes of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment options for their SKMs. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05387863; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05387863. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)/UNASSIGNED:PRR1-10.2196/41451.
PMCID:9482069
PMID: 36053558
ISSN: 1929-0748
CID: 5337892
Development and Pilot Evaluation of a Decision Aid for Small Kidney Masses
Thomas, Shailin A; Siriruchatanon, Mutita; Albert, Stephanie L; Bjurlin, Marc; Hoffmann, Jason C; Langford, Aisha; Braithwaite, R Scott; Makarov, Danil V; Fagerlin, Angela; Kang, Stella K
OBJECTIVE:To develop and pilot test a patient decision aid (DA) describing small kidney masses and risks and benefits of treatment for the masses. METHODS:An expert committee iteratively designed a small kidney mass DA, incorporating evidence-based risk communication and informational needs for treatment options and shared decision making. After literature review and drafting content with the feedback of urologists, radiologists, and an internist, a rapid qualitative assessment was conducted using two patient focus groups to inform user-centered design. In a pilot study, 30 patients were randomized at the initial urologic consultation to receive the DA or existing institutional patient educational material (PEM). Preconsultation questionnaires captured patient knowledge and shared decision-making preferences. After review of the DA and subsequent clinician consultation, patients completed questionnaires on discussion content and satisfaction. Proportions between arms were compared using Fisher exact tests, and decision measures were compared using Mann-Whitney tests. RESULTS:Patient informational needs included risk of tumor growth during active surveillance and ablation, significance of comorbidities, and posttreatment recovery. For the DA, 84% of patients viewed all content, and mean viewing time was 20 min. Significant improvements in knowledge about small mass risks and treatments were observed (mean total scores: 52.6% DA versus 22.3% PEM, PÂ <Â .001). DA use also increased the proportion of patients discussing ablation (66.7% DA versus 18.2% PEM, PÂ = .02). Decision satisfaction measures were similar in both arms. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients receiving a small kidney mass DA are likely to gain knowledge and preparedness to discuss all treatment options over standard educational materials.
PMID: 35714722
ISSN: 1558-349x
CID: 5282832
Patient reported outcomes in genital gender-affirming surgery: the time is now [Letter]
Agochukwu-Mmonu, Nnenaya; Radix, Asa; Zhao, Lee; Makarov, Danil; Bluebond-Langner, Rachel; Fendrick, A Mark; Castle, Elijah; Berry, Carolyn
Transgender and non-binary (TGNB) individuals often experience gender dysphoria. TGNB individuals with gender dysphoria may undergo genital gender-affirming surgery including vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, or metoidioplasty so that their genitourinary anatomy is congruent with their experienced gender. Given decreasing social stigma and increasing coverage from private and public payers, there has been a rapid increase in genital gender-affirming surgery in the past few years. As the incidence of genital gender-affirming surgery increases, a concurrent increase in the development and utilization of patient reported outcome measurement tools is critical. To date, there is no systematic way to assess and measure patients' perspectives on their surgeries nor is there a validated measure to capture patient reported outcomes for TGNB individuals undergoing genital gender-affirming surgery. Without a systematic way to assess and measure patients' perspectives on their care, there may be fragmentation of care. This fragmentation may result in challenges to ensure patients' goals are at the forefront of shared- decision making. As we aim to increase access to surgical care for TGNB individuals, it is important to ensure this care is patient-centered and high-quality. The development of patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing genital gender-affirming surgery is the first step in ensuring high quality patient-centered care. Herein, we discuss the critical need for development of validated patient reported outcome measures for transgender and non-binary patients undergoing genital reconstruction. We also propose a model of patient-engaged patient reported outcome measure development.
PMCID:9038968
PMID: 35467181
ISSN: 2509-8020
CID: 5217282
Effect of Androgen Suppression on Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Men With COVID-19: The HITCH Randomized Clinical Trial
Nickols, Nicholas G; Mi, Zhibao; DeMatt, Ellen; Biswas, Kousick; Clise, Christina E; Huggins, John T; Maraka, Spyridoula; Ambrogini, Elena; Mirsaeidi, Mehdi S; Levin, Ellis R; Becker, Daniel J; Makarov, Danil V; Adorno Febles, Victor; Belligund, Pooja M; Al-Ajam, Mohammad; Muthiah, Muthiah P; Montgomery, Robert B; Robinson, Kyle W; Wong, Yu-Ning; Bedimo, Roger J; Villareal, Reina C; Aguayo, Samuel M; Schoen, Martin W; Goetz, Matthew B; Graber, Christopher J; Bhattacharya, Debika; Soo Hoo, Guy; Orshansky, Greg; Norman, Leslie E; Tran, Samantha; Ghayouri, Leila; Tsai, Sonny; Geelhoed, Michelle; Rettig, Mathew B
Importance/UNASSIGNED:SARS-CoV-2 entry requires the TMPRSS2 cell surface protease. Antiandrogen therapies reduce expression of TMPRSS2. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To determine if temporary androgen suppression induced by degarelix improves clinical outcomes of inpatients hospitalized with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:The Hormonal Intervention for the Treatment in Veterans With COVID-19 Requiring Hospitalization (HITCH) phase 2, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial compared efficacy of degarelix plus standard care vs placebo plus standard care on clinical outcomes in men hospitalized with COVID-19 but not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Inpatients were enrolled at 14 Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals from July 22, 2020, to April 8, 2021. Data were analyzed from August 9 to October 15, 2021. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Patients stratified by age, history of hypertension, and disease severity were centrally randomized 2:1 to degarelix, (1-time subcutaneous dose of 240 mg) or a saline placebo. Standard care included but was not limited to supplemental oxygen, antibiotics, vasopressor support, peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis, intravenous fluids, remdesivir, convalescent plasma, and dexamethasone. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:The composite primary end point was mortality, ongoing need for hospitalization, or requirement for mechanical ventilation at day 15 after randomization. Secondary end points were time to clinical improvement, inpatient mortality, length of hospitalization, duration of mechanical ventilation, time to achieve a temperature within reference range, maximum severity of COVID-19, and the composite end point at 30 days. Results/UNASSIGNED:The trial was stopped for futility after the planned interim analysis, at which time there were 96 evaluable patients, including 62 patients randomized to the degarelix group and 34 patients in the placebo group, out of 198 initially planned. The median (range) age was 70.5 (48-85) years. Common comorbidities included chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (15 patients [15.6%]), hypertension (75 patients [78.1%]), cardiovascular disease (27 patients [28.1%]), asthma (12 patients [12.5%]), diabetes (49 patients [51.0%]), and chronic respiratory failure requiring supplemental oxygen at baseline prior to COVID-19 (9 patients [9.4%]). For the primary end point, there was no significant difference between the degarelix and placebo groups (19 patients [30.6%] vs 9 patients [26.5%]; P = .67). Similarly, no differences were observed between degarelix and placebo groups in any secondary end points, including inpatient mortality (11 patients [17.7%] vs 6 patients [17.6%]) or all-cause mortality (11 patients [17.7%] vs 7 patents [20.6%]). There were no differences between degarelix and placebo groups in the overall rates of adverse events (13 patients [21.0%] vs 8 patients [23.5%) and serious adverse events (19 patients [30.6%] vs 13 patients [32.4%]), nor unexpected safety concerns. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In this randomized clinical trial of androgen suppression vs placebo and usual care for men hospitalized with COVID-19, degarelix did not result in amelioration of COVID-19 severity. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04397718.
PMCID:9020208
PMID: 35438754
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5205312