Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:In 2012, the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) formally recommended against all Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer. Our goal was to characterize PSA screening trends in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) before and after the USPSTF recommendation, and to determine if PSA screening was more likely to be ordered based on a Veteran's race or age. METHODS:Using the VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we created 10 annual groups of PSA-eligible men covering 2009-2018. We identified all PSA tests performed in the VA to determine yearly rates of PSA screening. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS:The overall rate of PSA testing in the VA decreased from 63.3% in 2009 to 51.2% in 2018 (p<.001). PSA screening rates varied markedly by age group during our study period, with men aged 70-80 having the highest initial rate and greatest decline (70.6% in 2009 to 48.4% in 2018, p<.001). Men aged 55-69 saw a smaller decline (65.2% in 2009 to 58.9% in 2018, p<.001) while the youngest men, aged 40-54, had an increase in PSA screening (26.2% in 2009 to 37.8 in 2018, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS:In this analysis of PSA screening rates among veterans before and after the 2012 USPSTF recommendation against screening, we found that overall PSA screening decreased only modestly, continuing for more than half of the men in our study. Veterans of different races had similar screening rates, suggesting that VA care may minimize racial disparities. Veterans of varying age experienced significantly different trends in PSA screening.

OBJECTIVE:To determine if gender bias exists at the plenary sessions of the American Urologic Association (AUA) annual conference by evaluating variations in the use of a professional title (PT) during speaker introductions at these sessions. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed video archives of all plenary sessions from the American Urologic Association annual conferences from 2017-2019. Videos that included both plenary introducer and speaker were included for analysis. The following data were collected: conference year, gender and academic rank of 'introducer' and of 'speaker', and use of PT (ie: doctor) during speaker introduction. Variations in use of PT for introductions of speakers based on gender of introducer and of speaker were analyzed by chi-square tests. RESULTS:414 videos were reviewed; 195 (47%) with a composite 622 introducer/speaker pairs were reviewed and analyzed. Only 8.7% of introducers and 14.6% of speakers were female (Table 1). Overall, there was no difference in the use of PT for introductions of female versus male speakers (61.5% vs 60.8%, p = 0.90). However, male speakers were more likely to be introduced as doctor when introduced by a female versus a male (75.60% vs 59.60%, p=0.04). Female speakers were equally likely to be introduced as doctor regardless of introducer gender. CONCLUSIONS:Men represented the majority of presenters and speakers in the plenary session at American Urological Association meetings. However, there is not a significant difference in the use of professional title for AUA plenary speaker introductions based on gender.

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically impacted society and health care on a global scale. To capture the lived experience of patients with prostate cancer and family members/caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic, we performed a mixed-methods study of posts to two online networks. We compared all 6187 posts to the Inspire Us TOO Prostate Cancer online support and discussion community from December 2019 to April 2020, to 6926 posts from the same interval in 2019, applying a linguistic ethnography method. A similar analysis was performed using data from the Reddit discussion website (246 posts from 2019 and 260 posts from 2020). Manual qualitative analysis was performed for all 207 posts that mentioned COVID, COVID-19, or coronavirus. The computational linguistic ethnography analysis revealed a more collective tone in 2020, with increased concern about death. Our qualitative analysis showed that patients with prostate cancer and caregivers have concern about a variety of COVID-19-related impacts on care, including delays in testing and treatment. There was also substantial concern about the impact of having cancer on COVID-19 risk and access to COVID-19 care. Misinformation was present in 7% of COVID-19-related posts. In conclusion, online networks provide a useful source of real-world data from patients and their families, and analysis of these data highlighted a substantial impact of COVID-19 on prostate cancer care.

Prostate cancer is a complex disease that affects millions of men globally, predominantly in high human development index regions. Patients with localized disease at a low to intermediate risk of recurrence generally have a favourable outcome of 99% overall survival for 10 years if the disease is detected and treated at an early stage. Key genetic alterations include fusions of TMPRSS2 with ETS family genes, amplification of the MYC oncogene, deletion and/or mutation of PTEN and TP53 and, in advanced disease, amplification and/or mutation of the androgen receptor (AR). Prostate cancer is usually diagnosed by prostate biopsy prompted by a blood test to measure prostate-specific antigen levels and/or digital rectal examination. Treatment for localized disease includes active surveillance, radical prostatectomy or ablative radiotherapy as curative approaches. Men whose disease relapses after prostatectomy are treated with salvage radiotherapy and/or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for local relapse, or with ADT combined with chemotherapy or novel androgen signalling-targeted agents for systemic relapse. Advanced prostate cancer often progresses despite androgen ablation and is then considered castration-resistant and incurable. Current treatment options include AR-targeted agents, chemotherapy, radionuclides and the poly(ADP-ribose) inhibitor olaparib. Current research aims to improve prostate cancer detection, management and outcomes, including understanding the fundamental biology at all stages of the disease.

CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Germline testing (GT) is increasingly impacting prostate cancer (PCa) management and screening, with direct effects in urology, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. The majority of testing indications and recommendations center on men with metastatic disease, although guidelines now encompass newly diagnosed, early-stage PCa and entail assessment of personal history, pathologic features, and family history to determine eligibility for testing. OBJECTIVE:To describe current guidelines on GT for men with PCa and the impact on management. An additional objective was to review the literature on current uptake of GT across practice settings. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION/METHODS:A nonsystematic review was performed of current guidelines on GT in PCa from professional societies and consensus conferences, detailing supporting evidence for these recommendations. This was supplemented by a literature review of uptake of GT and precision medicine in practice. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS/RESULTS:Multiple guidelines and consensus panels recommend GT for men with metastatic PCa. Guidelines endorse BRCA2 testing in metastatic PCa because of strong evidence for PCa risk, aggressiveness, and PARP inhibitor candidacy. Testing of additional DNA repair genes in metastatic disease is also endorsed across guidelines. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab is an option in some guidelines for men with DNA mismatch repair deficiency. In localized disease, GT is recommended on the basis of histologic features and family history; criteria vary between guidelines. GT for localized disease informs hereditary cancer risk and will probably impact future PCa management. Practice gaps exist regarding utilization of GT. CONCLUSIONS:Germline evaluation is increasingly important in the management of men with metastatic PCa and may also affect the prognosis for men with localized disease. The presence of germline mutations has important hereditary cancer implications for men and their families. Uptake of germline evaluation may be underutilized in some practice settings, so strategies for optimization are required. PATIENT SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:Patients with prostate cancer should talk to their doctor about the pros and cons of genetic testing, with attention to family history and cancer features. Genetic testing can have important implications for treatment, cancer screening, and family cancer risk.

Dissemination of misinformation through social media is a major societal issue. Bladder cancer is the second most common urological cancer in the world, but there are limited data on the quality of bladder cancer information on social networks. Our objective was to characterize the quality of information and presence of misinformation about bladder cancer on YouTube, the most commonly used social media platform. We reviewed the first 150 YouTube videos about "bladder cancer" using two validated instruments for consumer health information and assessed the videos for the presence of misinformation. The videos had a median of 2288 views (range, 14-511 342), but the overall quality of information was moderate to poor in 67%, based on scores of 1-3 out of 5 on the validated DISCERN instrument. A moderate to high amount of misinformation was present in 21% of videos and reached 1 289 314 viewers. Commercial bias was apparent in 17% of videos, which reached 324 287 viewers. From a networking perspective, comments sections in the videos were sometimes used to request medical advice (20%), provide medical advice to others (9%), or give support (19%). In conclusion, YouTube is a widely used source of information and advice about bladder cancer, but much of the content is of poor quality. PATIENT SUMMARY: A large quantity of content about bladder cancer is available on YouTube. Unfortunately, much of the content is of moderate to poor quality and presents a risk of exposure to misinformation.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To perform a global survey assessing the role of and the attitudes towards media platforms amongst training Urologists METHODS: We distributed a 21-item online survey on social medial (SoMe) and other media platforms to current Urology trainees by email via individual institutions and multiple Urological associations. The survey acquired data including baseline characteristics, the role of and attitudes towards SoMe and other media platforms in training and assessed the prevalence of Social Media Disorder (SMD) based on the validated 9-item Social Media Disorder Scale. Stata IC was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS:Three hundred and seventy-two urology trainees in 6 continents participated in the survey. Overall, 99.4% used SoMe and 27.3% listened to healthcare-focused podcasts. Most trainees (85.5%) are using guideline apps for education purposes, with the top 3 most utilized apps being the EAU, AUA, and UpToDate applications. There was mixed sentiment regarding the impact of SoMe on the patient-physician relationship, wherein most felt it challenges the doctor's authority (56.7%) but also empowers the patient (62.7%) and encourages shared-care (57.3%). Unfortunately, 11.3% of urology trainees met criteria for SMD while 65.4% had not reviewed professional guidelines on appropriate SoMe use. CONCLUSIONS:Despite practically all urology trainees using SoMe and guideline applications, the majority of trainees have not reviewed or have been educated on professional guidelines for SoMe usage. There is a small but significant number of trainees who are at risk for social media disorder which may be contributing to higher rates of physician burnout amongst urologists.

BACKGROUND:Men have a higher risk of death from COVID-19 than women and androgens facilitate entrance of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into respiratory epithelial cells. Thus, androgen deprivation therapy may reduce infection rates and improve outcomes for COVID-19. In the spring of 2020, Sweden was highly affected by COVID-19. The aim was to estimate the impact of androgen deprivation therapy on mortality from COVID-19 in men with prevalent prostate cancer by comparing all-cause mortality in the spring of 2020 to that in previous years. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Using the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden all men with prostate cancer on March 1 each year in 2015-2020 were followed until June 30 the same year. Exposure to androgen deprivation therapy was ascertained from filled prescriptions for bicalutamide monotherapy, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH), or bilateral orchidectomy. RESULTS:A total of 9,822 men died in March-June in the years 2015-2020, of whom 5,034 men were on androgen deprivation therapy. There was an excess mortality in 2020 vs previous years in all men. The crude relative mortality rate ratio for 2020 vs 2015-2019 was 0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.04) in men on GnRH, and 0.90 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.05) in men on bicalutamide monotherapy. After multivariable adjustment these ratios were attenuated to 1.00 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.12) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.12), respectively. When restricting the analysis to the regions with the highest incidence of COVID-19 or to the time period between 2 April to 10 June when mortality in 2020 was increased >30% compared to previous years, the results were similar to the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS:In this large national population-based cohort of men with prevalent prostate cancer, there was no clear evidence in support for an effect of androgen deprivation therapy on COVID-19 mortality.

CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:Telemedicine provides remote clinical support using technological tools. It may facilitate health care delivery while reducing unnecessary visits to the clinic. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has caused an abrupt change in our daily urological practice, converting many of us to be reliant on telehealth. OBJECTIVE:To provide practical recommendations for effective use of technological tools in telemedicine. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION/METHODS:A Medline-based and gray literature search was conducted through April 2020. We selected the most relevant articles related to "telemedicine" and "smart working" that could provide important information. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS/RESULTS:Telemedicine refers to the use of electronic information and telecommunications tools to provide remote clinical health care support. Smart working is a model of work that uses new or existing technologies to improve performance. Telemedicine is becoming a useful invaluable tool during and even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. It is time for us to formalize the place of telemedicine in routine urological practice, and it is our responsibility to adapt and learn about all the tools and possible strategies for their optimal implementation during the pandemic to ensure that the quality of care received by patients and the outcomes of patients and their families are of the highest standard. CONCLUSIONS:Telemedicine facilitates specialized urological clinical support at a distance, solves problems of limitations in mobility, reduces unnecessary visits to clinics, and is useful for reducing the risk of viral transmission in the current COVID-19 outbreak. Furthermore, both personal and societal considerations may favor continued use of telemedicine, even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENT SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:Telemedicine in urology offers specialized remote clinical support to patients, similar to face-to-face visits. It is very useful for reducing unnecessary visits to the clinic, as well as reducing the risk of contagion in the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

INTRODUCTION:Telemedicine provides remote clinical support through technology tools. It can facilitate medical care delivery while reducing unnecessary office visits. The COVID-19 outbreak has caused an abrupt change in our daily urological practice, where teleconsultations play a crucial role. OBJECTIVE:To provide practical recommendations for the effective use of technological tools in telemedicine. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A literature search was conducted on Medline until April 2020. We selected the most relevant articles related to «telemedicine» and «smart working» that could provide valuable information. RESULTS:Telemedicine refers to the use of electronic information and telecommunication tools to provide remote clinical health care support. Smart working is a working approach that uses new or existing technologies to improve performance. Telemedicine is becoming a useful and fundamental tool during the COVID-19 pandemic and will be even more in the future. It is time for us to officially give telemedicine the place it deserves in clinical practice, and it is our responsibility to adapt and familiarize with all the tools and possible strategies for its optimal implementation. We must guarantee that the quality of care received by patients and perceived by them and their families is of the highest standard. CONCLUSIONS:Telemedicine facilitates remote specialized urological clinical support and solves problems caused by limited patient mobility or transfer, reduces unnecessary visits to clinics and is useful to reduce the risk of COVID-19 viral transmission.