Clinical significance of IDC-P as predictive factor after intensity-modulated radiation therapy

The clinical significance of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC‐P) in men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) treated with high‐dose external‐beam radiation therapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of IDC‐P in men who received intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nonmetastatic PCa. All patients with high‐risk (H‐R) and very high–risk (VH‐R) PCa who received IMRT between September 2000 and December 2013 at our institution were analyzed retrospectively. We re‐reviewed biopsy cores for the presence of IDC‐P. Treatment consisted of IMRT (median: 78 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction) plus 6‐month neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (HT). In total, 154 consecutive patients with H‐R and VH‐R PCa were analyzed. Intraductal carcinoma of the prostate was present in 27.9% (n = 43). The median follow‐up period was 8.4 years. The 10‐year PCa‐specific survival, biochemical failure (BF), clinical failure, and castration‐resistant PCa rates were 90.0%, 47.8%, 27.5%, and 24.5% in patients with IDC‐P, and 96.6%, 32.6%, 10.8%, and 7.0% in those without IDC‐P, respectively (p = 0.12, 0.04, 0.0031, and 0.012, respectively). In multivariable analysis, IDC‐P was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF (p = 0.26). The presence of IDC‐P was correlated with a significantly higher incidence of disease progression in men with H‐R and VH‐R PCa who received IMRT, although it was not identified as an independent predictive factor for BF. Further investigations are needed to determine the significance of IDC‐P as an independent predictive factor for survival outcomes.

The Prognosis of Radical Prostatectomy, External Beam Radiotherapy plus Brachytherapy, and External Beam Radiotherapy Alone for Patients above 70 Years with Very High-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Population-Matched Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy (EBRT + BT), and EBRT alone among elderly men (aged 70 years and above) with very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

We identified elderly men diagnosed with VHR PCa between 2004 and 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The propensity score-matching method was adopted to balance the covariates and generate new cohorts. -Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses were conducted to build up survival curves and evaluate the overall survival (OS) and PCa-specific survival (PCSS) outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 9,818 patients were identified. Of them, 5,839 were in the EBRT group, 725 in the EBRT + BT group, and 3,254 in the RP group. The survival curves of the overall cohort showed that RP was associated with the best OS, followed by EBRT + BT and EBRT (p < 0.001). As for the PCSS, RP shared similar outcomes with EBRT + BT (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.25 [0.93-1.69], p = 0.175). EBRT was associated with significantly worse PCSS than both RP (HR: 1.88, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] [1.64-2.15], p < 0.001) and EBRT + BT (HR: 1.48, 95% CI [1.19-1.85], p = 0.002). In the matched cohorts, RP presented better OS (HR: 1.41, 95% CI [1.07-1.86], p = 0.041) and similar PCSS with EBRT + BT (HR: 1.50, 95% CI [0.91-2.47], p = 0.12). RP was associated with significantly better OS and PCSS outcomes than EBRT alone (OS HR: 1.58, 95% CI [1.59-2.12], p < 0.001; PCSS HR: 2.08 [1.60-2.72], p < 0.001). EBRT + BT also had significantly better OS and PCSS outcomes than EBRT alone (OS HR: 1.33, 95% CI [1.11-1.60], p < 0.001; PCSS HR: 1.57 [1.13-2.19], p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients above 70 years with VHR PCa, RP was associated with better OS and similar PCSS than EBRT + BT. Both RP and EBRT + BT have better OS and PCSS than EBRT alone.

Geographic variations in lipid-lowering therapy utilization, LDL-C levels, and proportion retrospectively meeting the ACC/AHA very high-risk criteria in a real-world population of patients with major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We assessed national- and state-level geographic variations among patients with a history of ≥1 major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event in: (1) the proportion of patients with retrospectively identified 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline very high-risk (VHR) ASCVD criteria; (2) utilization of guideline-directed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT); and (3) the proportion of patients with persistent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) elevations despite statin and/or ezetimibe use.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using the Prognos LDL-C database linked to IQVIA longitudinal medical and prescription claims databases. The study period was from January 01, 2011, to November 30, 2019 and the index period was from January 01, 2016, to November 30, 2019; the index date was defined as the most recent LDL-C test during the index period. The study included patients aged ≥18 years at index who had a measured LDL-C level during the index period and had ≥1 inpatient/outpatient claim for ASCVD during the 5-year pre-index period.

RESULTS

Of patients with any ASCVD (N=4652,468), 1537,514 (33.1%) patients had ≥1 major ASCVD event. Among patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event, the VHR ASCVD criteria were retrospectively identified in 1139,018 (74.1%) patients; Hawaii had the highest (81.7%) and Colorado the lowest (65.0%) proportion of these patients. Nationally, 48.8% and 50.2% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had current LLT use; Massachusetts and Colorado had the highest and lowest proportions, respectively. After standardizing for age and sex, 57.3% and 58.8% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had LDL-C ≥70 mg/dL (≥1.8 mmol/L) despite statin and/or ezetimibe use, with substantial state-level variations observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights high rates of elevated LDL-C and pervasive underuse of LLT in health-insured patients with a history of major ASCVD events treated in the United States, with state-level geographic variations observed.

Percutaneous valved stent implantation in the ascending aorta for the treatment of very high-risk aortic regurgitation: an animal study

PURPOSE

We investigated the effects of percutaneous valved stent implantation in the ascending aorta as an alternative treatment for aortic regurgitation in a canine model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 16 healthy dogs weighing an average of 18.3 ± 2.1 kg were used for the establishment of animal models of chronic aortic regurgitation by percutaneous aortic valve perforation and balloon dilation. At 2 mo after successful model establishment, all experimental animals underwent valved stent implantation in the ascending aorta and then were followed up for 3 mo.

RESULTS

Experimental models of chronic aortic regurgitation were successfully established in 10 dogs. Surviving dogs underwent successful valved stent implantation in the ascending aorta and were subsequently followed up for 3 mo. The level of instantaneous aortic regurgitation at 3-mo follow-up was significantly reduced compared with that before valved stent implantation (2.4 ± 0.9 versus 10.6 ± 2.1 mL/s, P < 0.05). The left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly increased (53.8 ± 4.2% versus 37.8 ± 3.7%, P < 0.05), and the left ventricular end-diastolic volume was also significantly reduced (30.3 ± 2.2 versus 40.1 ± 3.6 mL, P < 0.05). No paravalvular leak, stroke, atrioventricular block, or other complications occurred in dogs undergoing valved stent implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous valved stent implantation in the ascending aorta is feasible, effective, and safe as an alternative treatment for very high-risk aortic regurgitation in a canine model.