Faculty Bibliography

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.

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.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Differences in public awareness and uptake of genetic testing among patients with inheritable cancers are not well understood. The purpose of this study is to examine self-reported rates of undergoing cancer-specific genetic testing in patients with breast/ovarian cancer vs prostate cancer from a nationally representative sample of U.S. PATIENTS/METHODS:Secondary objectives include examining sources of genetic testing information and perceptions of genetic testing for both patient populations as well as the general public. METHODS:testing was used to compare differences among categorical variables. RESULTS:= .003). Health care professionals were the most common source of genetic testing information for patients with breast/ovarian cancer whereas the Internet was the most common source for patients with prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest a lack of awareness and limited utilization of genetic testing among patients with prostate cancer relative to breast/ovarian cancer. Patients with prostate cancer cite the Internet and social media as sources of information, which may be an avenue for more optimal dissemination of evidence-based information.

BACKGROUND:Few studies have specifically examined sleep health in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Further study is warranted to inform future strategies in patients with NMIBC. OBJECTIVE:We aim to describe sleep health in a cohort of patients with NMIBC, and its relationship with quality of life (QOL). METHODS:We conducted an observational cross-sectional study in patients undergoing surveillance for NMIBC. The validated Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was used to assess sleep health (scores from 0-21) in the overall study population as well as stratified. We assessed QOL among participants with and without poor sleep quality using the SF-12 and QLQ-NMIBC-24. RESULTS:In a cohort of 94 NMIBC patients, median age was 67 years (IQR: 58, 72) and median time since initial diagnosis was 27 months (IQR: 9, 41). The mean PSQI score was 6.3 (SD: 3.8) and 64% percent of participants met or exceeded the PSQI cut-off score of 5, with a score of 5 or more indicating overall poor sleep quality. In those with poor sleep quality, there were statistically significant detriments in multiple QOL domains. CONCLUSIONS:In patients undergoing surveillance for NMIBC, there is a substantial burden of sleep disturbances and resulting decrements in QOL. These data support the need for future interventions to support sleep quality and highlight the importance of addressing sleep health as part of NMIBC survivorship care to improve QOL in patients with NMIBC.

BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer (PCa) and its treatment can have significant and pervasive sexual side effects for patients and their partners; however, partner needs are not well understood, and most resources do not incorporate partner priorities. AIM/OBJECTIVE:Our objective was to perform a qualitative study to identify unmet sexual needs of patients and female partners after PCa diagnosis. METHODS:We conducted a qualitative study of posts to the Inspire Us TOO Prostate Cancer Online Support and Discussion Community. Overall, 6,193 posts were identified in the Sexual Health & Intimacy forum of the community, of which 661 posts were from female authors. A random sample of 10% (n = 66) of posts from female partners and an equal number of randomly selected posts from male patients were analyzed. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:We assessed sexual health themes among patients and female partners. RESULTS:Multiple themes emerged that were unique to female partners of PCa survivors. These included expanding the sexual repertoire, feeling invisible, contextualizing sexual intimacy within the broader picture of survival, and addressing relationship concerns. Patients and their partners also shared common sexual health themes, including coming to terms with changes in sexual function and frustration with clinicians. Both patients and their partners use online health communities to get support and share their experiences with sexual recovery and use of sexual aids. Psychosocial treatments were infrequently mentioned, and may be particularly helpful to address partner concerns. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:A common concern for couples was not receiving sufficient information from healthcare providers regarding sexual side effects from PCa and its treatment. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:Strengths of the study include leveraging a unique data source to address an understudied topic of sexual health concerns among partners after PCa diagnosis. However, members of an online community may not be representative of all couples facing PCa. Also, this analysis is limited to female partners of patients with PCa, and further study is underway to examine the sexual health needs among gay and bisexual couples. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Both patients and female partners have many unmet sexual health needs during PCa survivorship, and designing interventions to incorporate partner perspectives may improve the management of sexual side effects of PCa for couples.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been hypothesized to protect against COVID-19, but previous observational studies of men with prostate cancer on ADT have been inconsistent regarding mortality risk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Using data from the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), we identified a cohort of 114 547 men with prevalent prostate cancer on the start of follow-up in February 2020, and followed them until 16 December 2020 to evaluate the association between ADT and time to test positive for COVID-19. Among men testing positive for COVID-19, we used regression analyses to estimate the association between ADT and risk of COVID-19-related hospital admission/death from any cause within 30 days of the positive test. In total, 1695 men with prostate cancer tested positive for COVID-19. In crude analyses, exposure to ADT was associated with a 3-fold increased risk of both testing positive for COVID-19 infection and subsequent hospital admission/death. Adjustment for age, comorbidity and prostate cancer risk category substantially attenuated the associations: HR 1.3 (95% CI: 1.1-1.5) for testing positive for COVID-19, and OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.0-1.9) for risk of subsequent hospital admission/death. In conclusion, although these results suggest increased risks of a positive COVID-19 test, and COVID-19-related hospital admission/death in men on ADT, these findings are likely explained by confounding by old age, cancer-associated morbidity and other comorbidities being more prevalent in men on ADT, rather than a direct effect of the therapy.

CONTEXT:Active surveillance (AS) is increasingly selected among patients with localized, intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa). However, the safety and optimal candidate selection for those with IR PCa remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate treatment-free survival and oncologic outcomes in patients with IR PCa managed with AS and to compare with AS outcomes in low-risk (LR) PCa patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:A literature search was conducted through February 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The coprimary outcomes were treatment-free, metastasis-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival. A subgroup analysis was planned a priori to explore AS outcomes when limiting inclusion to IR patients with a Gleason grade (GG) of ≤2. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:A total of 25 studies including 29 673 unselected IR patients met our inclusion criteria. The 10-yr treatment-free, metastasis-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival ranged from 19.4% to 69%, 80.8% to 99%, 88.2% to 99%, and 59.4% to 83.9%, respectively. IR patients had similar treatment-free survival to LR patients (risk ratio [RR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.99-1.36, p = 0.07), but significantly higher risks of metastasis (RR 5.79, 95% CI, 4.61-7.29, p < 0.001), death from PCa (RR 3.93, 95% CI, 2.93-5.27, p < 0.001), and all-cause death (RR 1.44, 95% CI, 1.11-1.86, p = 0.005). In a subgroup analysis of studies including patients with GG ≤2 only (n = 4), treatment-free survival (RR 1.03, 95% CI, 0.62-1.71, p = 0.91) and metastasis-free survival (RR 2.09, 95% CI, 0.75-5.82, p = 0.16) were similar between LR and IR patients. Treatment-free survival was significantly reduced in subgroups of patients with unfavorable IR disease and increased cancer length on biopsy. CONCLUSIONS:The present systematic review and meta-analysis highlight the need to optimize patient selection for those with IR features. Our findings support limiting the inclusion of IR patients in AS to those with low-volume GG 2 tumor. PATIENT SUMMARY:Active surveillance is increasingly used in patients with localized, intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer. In this population, we have reported higher risks of metastasis and cancer mortality in unselected patients than in patients with low-risk features, underscoring the need to optimize the selection of patients with IR features.

BACKGROUND:Gender composition among surgical academic leadership, including academic medical journals, disproportionately favors men and may inadvertently introduce a bias. An understanding of the factors associated with gender representation among urologic journals may aid in prioritizing an equitable balance. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate female representation on editorial boards of pre-eminent international urologic journals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:The names and position descriptions of urologic journal leadership appointees were collected in October 2021. Gender was assessed using gender-api.com or through personal title, as available. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS/METHODS:A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to describe associations between SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) quartile and geographic region with female gender representation. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 the bottom quartile concordant with journal impact factor. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:A total of 105 urology-focused journals were identified with 5989 total editorial board members, including 877 (14.6%) female, 5112 (85.4%) male, and two nonbinary persons. Female representation differed significantly by journal leadership position, SJR quartile, and geographic region. On the multivariate analysis of overall female representation, Q1 journals had higher odds of female representation than Q2 and Q3 journals, and had no significant difference from Q4 journals. Additionally, compared with Western Europe, North American journals had 78% higher odds while Asiatic journals had 50% lower odds of female representation. This study is limited by the inability to account for outside factors that lead to invitation or acceptance of journal leadership positions. CONCLUSIONS:Contemporary female leadership at urology journals is about six times less common than male leadership across all journals, although trends in their proportion were noted when assessed by journal quartile and region. Addressing this gender imbalance represents an important step toward achieving gender equity in the field of urology. PATIENT SUMMARY/RESULTS:In this study, we looked at the gender balance of academic journal leaders who serve as gatekeepers for sharing urologic research with the public. We found that the most prestigious journals and those in western countries tended to have the highest female representation. We hope that these findings help the academic community recognize and improve gender representation.