O’Neil, Brock

PURPOSE To compare patient-reported and clinical outcomes between radical cystectomy (RC) and bladder-sparing therapy (BST) in patients with recurrent high-grade non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS This pragmatic, prospective observational cohort study was designed with patients, who selected and prioritized outcomes. Eligible adults were candidates for both RC or BST, had previous induction Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), and received their last treatment within 12 months. The primary outcome was the EORTC-QLQ-C30 physical function scale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included other EORTC-QLQ-C30 scales, depression, anxiety, bladder cancer–specific quality of life (QOL), financial burden, and cancer-specific outcomes. Targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) was used to calculate average treatment effect (ATE) estimates between arms. Inverse probability weighted risk ratios (wRR) were calculated using quasi-Poisson regression. RESULTS Of 570 participants (mean age 71.4 years; 21% female), 371 selected BST and 199 selected RC. Physical function was significantly worse in the RC arm at 3 months; by 9 months, there was no difference between arms, and at 12 months, physical function did not differ (ATE, 0.9; 95% CI, –0.6 to 2.4; P = .22). RC was associated with better emotional function, generic health-related QOL, and financial burden, and lower depression and anxiety, while BST was associated with better bowel and sexual health. Cancer-specific survival was 99% for BST versus 96% for RC (wRR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.01). RC was associated with a higher risk of adverse events and serious adverse events, including a 90-day mortality rate of 2.5%. CONCLUSION Most patient-prioritized outcomes were similar or better among participants who chose RC compared with BST. These findings support the continued role of RC in managing recurrent high-grade NMIBC.

AbstractBackgroundThe psychological and cardiovascular health impacts on family members of patients who have been diagnosed with cancer have not been well characterized. The purpose of this study is to determine whether a family member’s cancer diagnosis influences the risk of psychological illness and cardiovascular disease in first‐degree relatives and spouses of patients affected by cancer.MethodsThis retrospective cohort analysis evaluated the risk of psychological illness and cardiovascular disease in first‐degree relatives and spouses of patients diagnosed with a genitourinary cancer between 1990 and 2015 compared to relatives of those not diagnosed with a genitourinary cancer. The Utah Population Database was used and familial linkage was determined. Follow‐up included 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year intervals. Patients residing outside of Utah and first‐degree relatives and spouses with psychological or cardiovascular disease diagnosed before a family member’s cancer diagnosis were excluded.ResultsA total of 49,284 patients with a genitourinary cancer were identified with 77,938 first‐degree relatives and spouses. A matched control group included 246,775 patients with 81,022 first‐degree relatives and spouses. Via Cox proportional hazards models, a 10% increased risk of developing a psychological illness (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00–1.20) and a 28% increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17–1.41) at 1 year after a family member’s cancer diagnosis were found.ConclusionsThis study provides population‐level evidence to support the hypothesis that cancer diagnoses will lead to adverse health outcomes for family members of patients with cancer. Increased clinical attention and support are needed to reduce the harm to families caused by cancer.

PURPOSE Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services. METHODS A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider). RESULTS Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing—initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing—was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM, for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM, and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches. CONCLUSION This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.