Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer (PCa) and its treatments can have a significant negative impact on the sexual health of survivors and couples, but few studies have specifically examined the impact of PCa-related sexual dysfunction on female partners of survivors. AIM:Our objective was to perform a qualitative study to comprehensively characterize female partners' perceptions of the implications of PCa on their sex lives, as well as partners' sexual health concerns and unmet needs. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews about sexual health and unmet needs with female partners of PCa survivors recruited from multiple clinical locations and support groups for PCa caregivers from September 2021 to March 2022. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and independently coded. Participants were recruited until thematic saturation was achieved. OUTCOMES:Outcomes of this study were female partner sexual health concerns and unmet needs. RESULTS:Among 12 participants, the median age was 65 (range 53 to 81) years, 9 were White, the median time since their partner's PCa diagnosis was 2.25 years (range 11 months to 20 years), and a majority reported that their partner had undergone radical prostatectomy, radiation, and/or hormonal therapy. Major emergent themes pertained to the significant impact of age- and PCa-related sexual dysfunction on female sexual quality of life, the dyadic nature of sexual dysfunction and recovery, the role of the partner in coping with and adjusting to sexual dysfunction, difficulties communicating about sexual dysfunction in an intimate relationship, a lack of physician-led sexual health counseling and support, and the benefit of peer interactions and proactive information seeking in addressing unmet sexual health needs. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:Future efforts should continue to explore the impact of PCa on partner sexual health and address unmet needs through sexual health education and support. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS:In this study, we identified female partners' sexual health concerns both related to and independent of PCa survivor sexual health. Limitations include exclusion of male partners of survivors and potential responder bias, as partners who agreed to participate may have experienced more sexual health concerns. CONCLUSION:We found that female partners experience PCa-related sexual dysfunction as a couple's disease, grief due to age- and PCa-related sexual losses, and a lack of physician-led sexual health counseling and information. Our results highlight the importance of including partners of PCa survivors in the sexual recovery process and of developing sexual care programs to address partners' unmet sexual health needs.

BACKGROUND:Active surveillance (AS) is recommended for low-risk and some intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Uptake and practice of AS vary significantly across different settings, as does the experience of surveillance-from which tests are offered, and to the levels of psychological support. OBJECTIVE:To explore the current best practice and determine the most important research priorities in AS for prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:A formal consensus process was followed, with an international expert panel of purposively sampled participants across a range of health care professionals and researchers, and those with lived experience of prostate cancer. Statements regarding the practice of AS and potential research priorities spanning the patient journey from surveillance to initiating treatment were developed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS/METHODS:Panel members scored each statement on a Likert scale. The group median score and measure of consensus were presented to participants prior to discussion and rescoring at panel meetings. Current best practice and future research priorities were identified, agreed upon, and finally ranked by panel members. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:There was consensus agreement that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which allows digital rectal examination (DRE) to be omitted, that repeat standard biopsy can be omitted when MRI and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics are stable, and that changes in PSA or DRE should prompt MRI ± biopsy rather than immediate active treatment. The highest ranked research priority was a dynamic, risk-adjusted AS approach, reducing testing for those at the least risk of progression. Improving the tests used in surveillance, ensuring equity of access and experience across different patients and settings, and improving information and communication between and within clinicians and patients were also high priorities. Limitations include the use of a limited number of panel members for practical reasons. CONCLUSIONS:The current best practice in AS includes the use of high-quality MRI to avoid DRE and as the first assessment for changes in PSA, with omission of repeat standard biopsy when PSA and MRI are stable. Development of a robust, dynamic, risk-adapted approach to surveillance is the highest research priority in AS for prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY/RESULTS:A diverse group of experts in active surveillance, including a broad range of health care professionals and researchers and those with lived experience of prostate cancer, agreed that best practice includes the use of high-quality magnetic resonance imaging, which can allow digital rectal examination and some biopsies to be omitted. The highest research priority in active surveillance research was identified as the development of a dynamic, risk-adjusted approach.

BACKGROUND:Social media use in medicine has exploded, with uptake by most physicians and patients. There is a risk of dissemination of inaccurate information about urological conditions on social media. Physicians, as key opinion leaders, must play a role in sharing evidence-based information through social media. OBJECTIVE:To identify and describe the top 100 urology influencers on the Twitter social media platform and to correlate Twitter influence with academic impact in urology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Twitter influence scores for the search topic "urology" were collected in April 2022 using published methodology. The top 100 personal accounts with the highest computed scores were linked to individuals' names, all-time h index, geographic location, specialty, attributed sex, and board certification status in this cross-sectional study. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS/METHODS:We examined the correlation between influence rank and h index. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Of the top 100 Twitter influencers on the topic of urology, the majority are from the USA (64%), male (85%), and practicing urologists (91%). Some 93% of US urology influencers are board-certified. Only 22 of the 50 US states are represented. The second most frequent country is the UK, with ten urology influencers. The median all-time h index is 42 (interquartile range 28.25-58). There is a weak positive correlation between influence rank and h index (r = 0.23; p = 0.02). Limitations of the study include the inability to validate the accuracy of the proprietary ranking algorithm and investigation of just one social media platform. CONCLUSIONS:The top Twitter influencers in urology are mostly board-certified US urologists. Collectively, influencers have a relatively greater academic impact in comparison to the average urologist, although there is a weak positive correlation between Twitter influence and h index among top Twitter influencers. PATIENT SUMMARY/RESULTS:Given the explosion of medical information on Twitter, we report the personal accounts with the greatest impact for the topic of "urology". We found that most urology influencers on Twitter are US board-certified urologists with a strong research history.

CONTEXT:Prostate cancer (PCa) is a leading cause of death and partially heritable. Genetic risk prediction might be useful for strategies to reduce PCa mortality through early detection and prevention. OBJECTIVE:To review evidence for genetic risk prediction for PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:A collaborative literature review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. Search terms included genetic, risk, prediction, and "prostate cancer". Articles addressing screening, early detection, or prevention were prioritized, as were studies involving diverse populations. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Rare pathogenic mutations (RPMs), especially in DNA damage repair genes, increase PCa risk. RPMs in BRCA2 are most clearly deleterious, conferring 2-8.6 times higher risk of PCa and a higher risk of aggressive disease. Common genetic variants can be combined into genetic risk scores (GRSs). A high GRS (top 20-25% of the population) confers two to three times higher risk of PCa than average; a very high GRS (top 1-5%) confers six to eight times higher risk. GRSs are not specific for aggressive PCa, possibly due to methodological limitations and/or a field effect of an elevated risk for both low- and high-grade PCa. It is challenging to disentangle genetics from structural racism and social determinants of health to understand PCa racial disparities. GRSs are independently associated with a lethal PCa risk after accounting for family history and race/ancestry. Healthy lifestyle might partially mitigate the risk of lethal PCa. CONCLUSIONS:Genetic risk assessment is becoming more common; implementation studies are needed to understand the implications and to avoid exacerbating healthcare disparities. Men with a high genetic risk of PCa can reasonably be encouraged to adhere to a healthy lifestyle. PATIENT SUMMARY:Prostate cancer risk is inherited through rare mutations and through the combination of hundreds of common genetic markers. Some men with a high genetic risk (especially BRCA2 mutations) likely benefit from early screening for prostate cancer. The risk of lethal prostate cancer can be reduced through a healthy lifestyle.

OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:This study aimed to evaluate content quality and racial/ethnic representation, particularly of high-risk cohorts, of prostate cancer screening videos on YouTube (YT) and TikTok (TK). MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:The top 50 videos populated for the search term 'prostate cancer screening' on YT and TK that met inclusion criteria were retrieved in a cache-cleared browser. Three reviewers analysed all videos using validated criteria for the quality of consumer health information (DISCERN and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT]). High quality was defined as follows: DISCERN ≥ 4, PEMAT understandability ≥75% and PEMAT actionability ≥75%. A 5-point Likert scale was used to demonstrate the level of misinformation compared to American Urological Association and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Perceived race and ethnicity of people in the videos were assessed by consensus approach. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.03) than YT videos. Perceived Black and Hispanic representation was present in 10% and 6% of YT videos and 20% and 12% of TK videos, respectively. High-risk racial/ethnic groups were explicitly discussed in 46% of YT videos and 8% of TK videos. A total of 98% of YT videos and 100% of TK videos had low- to moderate-quality consumer health information, and 88% of YT videos and 100% of TK videos had moderate to high levels of misinformation based on screening guidelines. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:YT and TK videos about prostate cancer screening are widely viewed but do not provide quality consumer health information. Black and Hispanic men remain under-represented on both platforms, and high-risk racial groups were not discussed in most videos despite the importance for screening criteria. The low understandability and actionability, significant misinformation and lack of diversity in online videos support the need for higher quality videos with adequate attention to high-risk ethnic cohorts.

BACKGROUND:The prevalence of sleep disturbances among prostate cancer (PCa) survivors, and extent of urologist involvement in sleep care are not well-studied. METHODS:PCa survivors (n = 167) and urologists (n = 145) were surveyed about sleep disturbances and survivorship care practices. RESULTS:Most PCa survivors had sleep disturbances, including 50.9% with poor sleep quality, 18.0% with clinical/severe insomnia, and 36.5% at high-risk for sleep apnea. Few urologists routinely screened for sleep disturbances, as recommended in national cancer survivorship guidelines. CONCLUSIONS:Optimal PCa survivorship care should incorporate screening for sleep disturbances, addressing comorbid factors affecting sleep and referring to sleep medicine when appropriate.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:It is unknown whether compliance with recommended monitoring tests during observation of localized prostate cancer has changed over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer in 2004-2016 who were initially managed with observation for a minimum of 12 months. The primary objective was to examine rates of PSA testing, prostate biopsy, and prostate MRI. We used multivariable mixed effects Poisson regression to determine whether rates of PSA testing and prostate biopsy increased over time. In addition, we identified clinical, sociodemographic, and provider factors associated with the frequency of monitoring tests during observation. RESULTS:We identified 10,639 patients diagnosed at a median age of 73 (IQR 69-77) years. The median follow-up time was 4.3 (IQR 2.7-6.6) years after diagnosis. Among patients managed without treatment for 5 years, 98% received at ≥1 PSA test, 48.0% ≥1 additional prostate biopsy, and 31.0% ≥1 prostate MRI. Among patients managed with observation for ≥12 months, mixed effects Poisson regression revealed that rates of PSA testing and biopsy increased over time (per calendar year: RR 1.02, 95% CI: 1.02-1.03 and RR 1.10, 95% CI: 1.08-1.11, respectively). Clinical and sociodemographic factors including age, clinical risk, race/ethnicity, census tract poverty, and region were associated with rates of biopsy and PSA testing. CONCLUSIONS:Use of recommended monitoring tests including repeat prostate biopsy remains low among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing observation for low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

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.