O'Byrne, J

ABSTRACT Purpose The natural history of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains understudied, with limited long‐term data from large cohorts inclusive of both salvage radiotherapy (SRT)‐treated and untreated patients. Herein, we sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients with BCR and the impact of SRT on disease progression. Materials and Methods Patients undergoing RP who developed BCR (PSA ≥ 0.20 ng/mL) were included. Patients with BCR treated with SRT were compared to untreated patients using risk‐set matching with time‐dependent propensity scores. The primary outcome was metastases, analyzed using Kaplan–Meier and Cox models. The number needed to treat (NNT) with SRT to prevent progression was derived at 5 and 15 years. Results Among 6881 patients with BCR, 2109 received SRT. At a median follow‐up of 10.2 years, 1147 patients developed metastases. The median PSA at the time of SRT was 0.50 ng/mL. After 1:1 propensity score matching (2109 patients per cohort), SRT significantly reduced the risk of metastases at 5 (12.7% vs. 19.3%, p < 0.0001) and 15 years (28.6% vs. 31.5%, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, SRT independently reduced metastasis risk (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63–0.90, p = 0.002), translating to NNT of 23 and 15 at 5 and 15 years, respectively. Interaction analyses between SRT and nodal status ( p = 0.04) showed greater metastasis risk reduction in pN+ (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22–0.77, p = 0.005) compared to pN− disease (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67–0.97, p = 0.02). Conclusions Most patients with BCR post‐RP do not progress to metastasis. For those who do progress, SRT inarguably improves the oncologic outcomes in the BCR setting. However, careful patient selection and shared decision making should be encouraged in order to limit overtreatment and side effects.

129 Background: Few studies have explored the use of focal therapies to address select sites of resistant disease in men receiving 177-Lu-PSMA-617 for metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Our institutional practice is to offer SBRT for patients with up to 5 sites of oligoprogression or non-responding lesions while undergoing 177Lu-PSMA-617 (every 6 weeks for 6 cycles total). This is determined by PSMA or choline PET imaging during the course of 177Lu-PSMA-617. Herein, we evaluated the safety of adding target SBRT during treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617. Methods: This retrospective single institution analysis was conducted via systematic chart review to evaluate for adverse events during or after treatment. Grading of treatment-related adverse events was conducted using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0 (CTCAE v5). Results: Thirty-one patients receiving 177Lu-PSMA-617 with 51 sites of oligoprogressive or non-responding metastatic disease were treated with SBRT. The median number of sites treated was 1 (range 1-4). Most patients received SBRT immediately after cycle 6 (32%) or after cycle 3 or 4 (42%). Bone was the most commonly treated site of disease (90%) with the majority (54%) of bone sites being spine or sacrum, followed by lymph nodes (10%). Ultimately, 84% of patients completed all 6 cycles of 177Lu-PSMA-617 (range 4-6). The median follow-up time was 19.1 months (IQR 15.5-22.4) after 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy start. A total of 2 patients experienced a pathologic fracture within the SBRT treatment field that could possibly be related to radiotherapy. One patient experienced a grade 2 neuropathy which may have been related to radiation therapy. Other potential adverse events are listed (Table). Conclusions: Our data demonstrates a low rate of significant toxicity with the use SBRT during treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617. Further study is indicated to determine the oncologic efficacy and potential late side effects of this treatment strategy. Adverse events. Event All Grades Grade > 3 Any Adverse Event 104 2 Anemia 29 (94%) 0 Low Platelets 11 (35.5%) 1 (3.2%) Any Pathologic Fracture 7 (22.5%) 1 (3.2%) Possible SBRT-related Pathologic Fracture 2 (6.5%) 1 (3.2%) Bone Pain Flare 3 (9.6%) 0 Neuropathy 1 (3.2%) 0

Objective(s): To quantify and compare pre-procedure worry versus the experience of pain, gagging, and dyspnea during in-office laryngoscopy procedures in patients who did or did not receive pre-procedure anxiolytics, and to explore patient perception of intra-procedure interventions. Methods: Patients undergoing awake laryngology procedures at a quaternary care center were enrolled. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) Y1 and Y2 questionnaires were administered to establish baseline levels of state anxiety and trait anxiety, respectively. Pre-procedure and post-procedure surveys assessed patient perception of select interventions. Results: 34 patients were enrolled (35.3% female, 91.2% white, mean age 60 years). Pre-procedure, 51.5% of patients reported some degree of worry about pain, 61.8% about gagging, 52.9% about dyspnea, and 55.9% about having something in their nose/throat. Post-procedure, 54.5% reported experiencing pain to some degree, 63.6% had gagging, 39.4% had dyspnea, and 78.7% were bothered by having something in their nose/throat. Patients who received a pre-procedure anxiolytic were significantly more likely to report more pain compared to those who did not. The highest rated interventions were pre-procedural education (97.0% “Very helpful”), verbal reassurance (96.9%), provider communicating steps of the procedure (96.9%), and reminders to breathe (87.5%). Conclusion: For patients undergoing awake laryngology procedures, the anticipation of gagging, pain, trouble breathing, and scope-related discomfort are worrisome factors. Of these, scope-related discomfort and gagging are the most often-reported sources of intraprocedural discomfort. The interventions patients found most helpful were based on preprocedural education and clear intraprocedural communication, which suggests that purposeful communication has a role in relieving anxiety. Level of evidence: Level 4

Importance Hispanic adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are more likely to develop complications and die from the disease than the US general population. Digital storytelling interventions are narrative-based videos elicited through a community-based participatory research approach to surface the authentic voices of participants overcoming obstacles to health-promoting behaviors that perpetuate health inequities; research on the effect of digital storytelling on T2D outcomes among Hispanic adults is lacking. Objective To assess the impact of a digital storytelling intervention on glycemic control and its acceptability among Hispanic patients with poorly controlled T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted within 2 primary care networks in Minnesota and Arizona among Hispanic adults with poorly controlled T2D (hemoglobin A 1c level ≥8%). Enrollment and follow-up were conducted between February 14, 2019, and November 1, 2023. Intervention The intervention group viewed a 12-minute digital storytelling video. The video included 4 Spanish-language stories that reinforced 4 diabetes self-management behavioral goals (healthful diet for diabetes, physical activity, medication adherence, and glucose self-monitoring). The control group received printed, culturally tailored T2D education materials. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the mean change from baseline to 3 months for hemoglobin A 1c levels, adjusting for baseline hemoglobin A 1c , age, gender, education, and income. Acceptability and narrative quality of the intervention were assessed through questionnaires. Results There were 451 study participants, with 227 (mean [SD] age, 54.3 [9.3] years; 158 [69.3%] women) randomized to the intervention group and 224 (mean [SD] age, 54.5 [9.1] years; 156 [69.3%] women) to the control group. Of these, 390 completed 3-month follow-up of the primary outcome (86% retention). There was a small improvement in the mean (SD) hemoglobin A 1c level in the intervention group compared with the control group in the adjusted model (9.1% [1.7] to 8.4% [1.6] vs 9.4% [1.8] to 8.8% [2.0]; P = .04] but not in the unadjusted model. Acceptability and narrative quality of the intervention were high. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, a digital storytelling intervention developed with and for Hispanic adults with T2D was highly acceptable and feasibly implemented within primary care settings and resulted in a modest improvement of glycemic control. This was a highly scalable intervention that may be integrated into clinical practice as part of a longitudinal diabetes self-management program for Hispanic adults. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03766438