The attitudes of British surgical trainees about the treatment of HIV-infected patients

Prostate cancer presentation, treatment selection, and outcomes among men with HIV/AIDS: A clinical stage, race, and age-matched contemporary analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical presentation, treatment receipt, and oncologic outcomes between human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive (HIV+) and seronegative (HIV-) men with prostate cancer (CaP) matched by age, clinical stage, and race.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 3,135 men treated for CaP from 2000 to 2016 was performed. HIV+ patients (N = 46) were matched 1:2 to 3 to HIV- men (N = 137) by age, race, and clinical stage. Clinicopathologic features and primary treatment received were compared between cohorts. Associations between HIV status and progression-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival were compared by HIV status using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

After matching, men with and without HIV were similar with respect initial prostate-specific antigen, Gleason Sum, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. Among HIV+ men, 67.4% had a history of acquired immune deficiency syndrome, and 91.3% were on highly active antiretroviral therapy at CaP diagnosis. Among men with localized disease, HIV+ men were more likely to receive radiation (59.5% vs. 44.8%) or no therapy (13.5% vs. 4.3%) and less likely to receive surgery (16.2% vs. 30.2%), or to initiate active surveillance (10.8% vs. 16.4%; P = 0.04 overall). There were no differences in rates of clinical progression, development of castration resistance, or CaP death by HIV status. However, HIV+ status was associated with inferior overall survival (hazard ratio 2.89, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

While most HIV+ patients had a history of acquired immune deficiency syndrome; HIV was well controlled in the majority of patients at the time of CaP diagnosis. While oncologic outcomes were similar between HIV+ and HIV- men, significant differences in treatment selection were observed. Further research is necessary to understand differences in treatment election by HIV status and to define optimal CaP treatment selection in men with HIV.

Are HIV-infected men vulnerable to prostate cancer treatment disparities?

BACKGROUND

HIV-infected (HIV(+)) men face cancer treatment disparities that impact outcome. Prostate cancer treatment and treatment appropriateness in HIV(+) men are unknown.

METHODS

We used electronic chart review to conduct a retrospective cohort study of 43 HIV(+) cases with prostate cancer and 86 age- and race-matched HIV-uninfected (HIV(-)) controls with prostate cancer, ages 40 to 79 years, from 2001 to 2012. We defined treatment appropriateness using National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) to estimate life expectancy.

RESULTS

Median age was 59.5 years at prostate cancer diagnosis. Median CD4(+) T-cell count was 459.5 cells/mm(3), 95.3% received antiretroviral therapy, and 87.1% were virally suppressed. Radical prostatectomy was the primary treatment for 39.5% of HIV(+) and 71.0% of HIV(-) men (P = 0.004). Only 16.3% of HIV(+) versus 57.0% of HIV(-) men received open radical prostatectomy (P < 0.001). HIV(+) men received more radiotherapy (25.6% vs. 16.3%, P = 0.13). HIV was negatively associated with open radical prostatectomy (OR = 0.03, P = 0.007), adjusting for insurance and CCI. No men were undertreated. Fewer HIV(+) men received appropriate treatment (89.2% vs. 100%, P = 0.003), due to four overtreated HIV(+) men. Excluding AIDS from the CCI still resulted in fewer HIV(+) men receiving appropriate treatment (94.6% vs. 100%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Prostate cancer in HIV(+) men is largely appropriately treated. Under- or overtreatment may occur from difficulties in life expectancy estimation. HIV(+) men may receive more radiotherapy and fewer radical prostatectomies, specifically open radical prostatectomies.

IMPACT

Research on HIV/AIDS survival indices and etiologies and outcomes of this prostate cancer treatment disparity in HIV(+) men are needed.