Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Plant-based diets are associated with multiple health benefits and a favorable environmental impact. For prostate cancer, previous studies suggest a beneficial role of specific plant-based foods (e.g., tomatoes) and a potentially harmful role of specific animal-based foods (e.g., meat, dairy). However, less is known about plant-based dietary patterns. OBJECTIVES:We sought to examine the relation between plant-based diet indices and prostate cancer risk, including clinically relevant disease. METHODS:This was a prospective cohort study including 47,239 men in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2014). Overall and healthful plant-based diet indices were calculated from FFQs. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate HRs and 95% CIs to examine the risk of incident prostate cancer (total and by clinical category), among men ages <65 and ≥65 y. RESULTS:Of the 47,239 men, 6655 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer over follow-up, including 515 with advanced-stage disease at diagnosis, 956 with lethal disease (metastasis or death), and 806 prostate cancer deaths. Greater overall plant-based consumption was associated with a significantly lower risk of fatal prostate cancer (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.64, 1.01; P-trend = 0.04). In men aged <65, a higher plant-based diet index was associated with a lower risk of advanced, lethal, and fatal prostate cancer. Moreover, greater consumption of a healthful plant-based diet was associated with lower risks of total (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.98; P-trend = 0.046) and lethal prostate cancer (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.94; P-trend = 0.03) at age <65. There were no associations between overall or healthful plant-based diet indices with prostate cancer among men ≥65 y. Fewer than 1% of participants followed a strict vegetarian or vegan diet. CONCLUSIONS:This prospective study provides supportive evidence that greater consumption of healthful plant-based foods is associated with a lower risk of aggressive forms of prostate cancer, with stronger benefit among men aged <65 y.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Although the Decipher genomic classifier has been validated as a prognostic tool for several prostate cancer endpoints, little is known about its role in assessing the risk of biopsy reclassification for patients on active surveillance, a key event that often triggers treatment. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate the association between Decipher genomic classifier scores and biopsy Gleason upgrading among patients on active surveillance. Design setting and participants/UNASSIGNED:This was a retrospective cohort study among patients with low- and favorable intermediate-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance who underwent biopsy-based Decipher testing as part of their clinical care. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis/UNASSIGNED:We evaluated the association between the Decipher score and any increase in biopsy Gleason grade group (GG) using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. We compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for models comprising baseline clinical variables with or without the Decipher score. Results and limitations/UNASSIGNED:= 0.02). The Decipher score was associated with upgrading among patients with biopsy GG 1 disease, but not GG2 disease. The discriminative ability of a clinical model (AUC 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.74) was improved by integration of the Decipher score (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.80). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:The Decipher genomic classifier score was associated with short-term biopsy Gleason upgrading among patients on active surveillance. Patient summary/UNASSIGNED:The results from this study indicate that among patients with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance, those with higher Decipher scores were more likely to have higher-grade disease found over time. These findings indicate that the Decipher test might be useful for guiding the intensity of monitoring during active surveillance, such as more frequent biopsy for patients with higher scores.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Black men have the highest incidence and mortality from prostate cancer (PCa) and lower quality of life compared to other U.S. racial groups. Additionally, more Latinx men are diagnosed with advanced disease and fewer receive guideline-concordant care. As many men seek medical information online, high-quality information targeting diverse populations may mitigate disparities. We examined racial/ethnic representation and information quality in online PCa content. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We retrieved 150 websites and 150 videos about "prostate cancer" using the most widely used search engine (Google) and social network (YouTube). We assessed quality of health information, reading level, perceived race/ethnicity of people featured in the content and discussion of racial/ethnic disparities. RESULTS:Among 81 websites and 127 videos featuring people, 37% and 24% had perceived Black representation, and racial/ethnic disparities were discussed in 27% and 17%, respectively. Among 1,526 people featured, 9% and 1% were perceived as Black and Latinx, respectively. No content with Black or Latinx representation was high quality, understandable, actionable and at the recommended reading level. CONCLUSIONS:Black and Latinx adults are underrepresented in online PCa content. Online media have significant potential for public education and combating health disparities. However, most PCa content lacks diversity and is not readily understandable.

Introduction & Objectives: Gender composition within surgical academic leadership, including academic medical journals, disproportionately favors men. Disparities in journal leadership may introduce bias due to the familiar nature of reviewing and accepting academic publications. Genderrepresentation among academic urological journals' editorial boards has not yet been assessed. We evaluated female representation on editorialboards of urologic journals across multiple countries.Materials & Methods: Urologic journal leadership appointees' names and position descriptions were collected (from what pool? Did you surveyevery academic urology journal in the world?). Probable gender was obtained using gender-api.com or through personal title, as available. Journaleditorial positions were aggregated into broad leadership categories. Journal characteristics were summarized by Scimago Journal quartile (3 year,algorithmic weighted citation ranking) and geographic area. Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to assessfemale gender representation (p<0.05 significant).
Result(s): A total of 105 journals were reviewed with 5,991 total members: 877 (14.6%) female, 5,112 (85.3%) male and 2 (0.03%) non-binarypersons. Female representation significantly differed by leadership position, journal ranking, and geographic region. Editors-in-chief roles had thelowest female representation (48 females, 12.1%), while non-academic (32 females, 40.5%) and administrative (4 females, 80%) positions werehighest. Female representation, by journal ranking, was highest in Q1 (417 females, 19.4%) and lowest in Q3 (133 females, 8.9%) and by region,was highest in North American (323 females, 23.0%) and lowest in Asiatic region journals (55 females, 6.6%). On multivariate logistic regressionanalysis, Q1 journals had higher odds of female representation compared to Q2 and Q3. Additionally, compared to Western Europe, North Americanjournals had 78% higher odds and Asiatic journals had 50% lower odds of female representation (Fig 1).(Figure Presented)Conclusions: Female representation in urologic journal leadership is low across all journals, although trends in their proportion were identified by journal quartile and region. Addressing this gender imbalance may improve equal gender representation in journals and likely also improve female authored publication rates
Copyright

BACKGROUND:Multiparametric MRI localizes cancer in the prostate, allowing for MRI guided biopsy (MRI-GB) 43 alongside transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB). Three MRI-GB approaches exist; visual estimation (COG-TB); fusion software-assisted (FUS-TB) and MRI 'in-bore' biopsy (IB-TB). It is unknown whether any of these are superior. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address three questions. First, whether MRI-GB is superior to TRUS-GB at detecting clinically significant PCa (csPCa). Second, whether MRI-GB is superior to TRUS-GB at avoiding detection of insignificant PCa. Third, whether any MRI-GB strategy is superior at detecting csPCa. METHODS:A systematic literature review from 2015 to 2019 was performed in accordance with the START recommendations. Studies reporting PCa detection rates, employing MRI-GB and TRUS-GB were included and evaluated using the QUADAS-2 checklist. 1553 studies were found, of which 43 were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS:For csPCa, MRI-GB was superior in detection to TRUS-GB (0.83 vs. 0.63 [p = 0.02]). MRI-GB was superior in detection to TRUS-GB at avoiding detection of insignificant PCa. No MRI-GB technique was superior at detecting csPCa (IB-TB 0.87; COG TB 0.81; FUS-TB 0.81, [p = 0.55]). There was significant heterogeneity observed between the included studies. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with suspected PCa on MRI, MRI-GB offers superior rates of csPCa detection and reduces detection of insignificant PCa compared to TRUS-GB. No individual MRI-GB technique was found to be better in csPCa detection. Prospective adequately powered randomized controlled trials are required.

Men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) are increasingly electing active surveillance (AS) as their initial management strategy. While this may reduce the side effects of treatment for prostate cancer, many men on AS eventually convert to active treatment. PC is one of the most heritable cancers, and genetic factors that predispose to aggressive tumors may help distinguish men who are more likely to discontinue AS. To investigate this, we undertook a multi-institutional genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 5,222 PC patients and 1,139 other patients from replication cohorts, all of whom initially elected AS and were followed over time for the potential outcome of conversion from AS to active treatment. In the GWAS we detected 18 variants associated with conversion, 15 of which were not previously associated with PC risk. With a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), we found two genes associated with conversion (MAST3, p = 6.9×10^-7 and GAB2, p = 2.0×10^-6). Moreover, increasing values of a previously validated 269-variant genetic risk score (GRS) for PC was positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the highest to the two middle deciles gave a hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]= 0.94-1.36); whereas, decreasing values of a 36-variant GRS for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the lowest to the two middle deciles gave a HR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.50). These results suggest that germline genetics may help inform and individualize the decision of AS-or the intensity of monitoring on AS-versus treatment for the initial management of patients with low-risk PC.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The incidence and severity of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is substantially higher in men. Sex hormones may be a potential mechanism for differences in COVID-19 outcome in men and women. We hypothesized that men treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) have lower incidence and severity of COVID-19. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We conducted an observational study of male Veterans treated in the Veterans Health Administration from February 15th to July 15th, 2020. We developed a propensity score model to predict the likelihood to undergo Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. We performed multivariable logistic regression modeling adjusted with inverse probability weighting to examine the relationship between ADT and COVID-19 incidence. We conducted logistic regression analysis among COVID-19 patients to test the association between ADT and COVID-19 severity. Results/UNASSIGNED:= 0.03). Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:ADT is associated with reduced incidence and severity of COVID-19 amongst male Veterans. Testosterone and androgen receptor signaling may confer increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and contribute to severe COVID-19 pathophysiology in men.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Androgens facilitate entrance of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 into respiratory epithelial cells, and male sex is associated with a higher risk of death from corona virus disease (COVID-19). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) could possibly improve COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:In a case-control study nested in the Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe) RAPID 2019, we evaluated the association between ADT and COVID-19 as registered cause of death in men with prostate cancer. Each case was matched to 50 controls by region. We used conditional logistic regression to adjust for confounders and also evaluated potential impact of residual confounding. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We identified 474 men who died from COVID-19 in March-December 2020. In crude analyses, ADT exposure was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% CI: 4.18-6.10); however, the OR was substantially attenuated after adjustment for age, comorbidity, prostate cancer characteristics at diagnosis, recent healthcare use, and indicators of advanced cancer (adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI: 0.95-1.65). If adjustment has accounted for at least 85% of confounding, then the true effect could be no more than a 5% reduction of the odds for COVID-19 death. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:The increased mortality from COVID-19 in men with prostate cancer treated with ADT was mainly related to high age, comorbidity, and more advanced prostate cancer. There was no evidence to support the hypothesis that ADT is associated with improved COVID-19 outcomes.