Abdollah, Firas

Objectives To develop an internationally validated, structured robot‐assisted radical nephroureterectomy (RARNU) training programme through expert consensus. Materials and Methods A RARNU‐specific questionnaire was developed/adapted from previously published, validated questionnaires for robot‐assisted urological procedures. This included five key domains and 11 surgical steps. In all, 30 upper tract urothelial carcinoma experts were invited to participate. A two‐stage modified Delphi approach was employed. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement. Modifications and additional statements were proposed during the second round following qualitative/quantitative feedback from the initial round. Results Response rates for the first and second Delphi rounds were 80% (24/30) and 92% (22/24), respectively. All agreed that adoption of a standardised training curriculum can improve clinical outcomes during the RARNU learning curve. There was ≥92% agreement on all proposed RARNU steps. Five RARNU clinical modules of increasing complexity were defined using individual step difficulty and number of prior RARNU cases required, with ≥96% agreement among respondents. Respondents unanimously agreed that the final assessment should be based on a procedure‐specific scale focusing on the hilar dissection, ureteric dissection, and bladder cuff excision steps. No consensus was reached for the annual minimum RARNU volume required for eligibility as a RARNU curriculum host centre. Conclusion This is the first structured training curriculum for RARNU using international expert consensus. This will help guide surgical educators and trainees toward independent completion of a full RARNU.

Objectives: To identify correlates of survival and perioperative outcomes of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) patients undergoing open (ORNU), laparoscopic (LRNU), and robotic (RRNU) radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study that included non-metastatic UTUC patients who underwent RNU between 1990–2020. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to impute missing data. Patients were divided into three groups based on their surgical treatment and were adjusted by 1:1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Survival outcomes per group were estimated for recurrence-free survival (RFS), bladder recurrence-free survival (BRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Perioperative outcomes: Intraoperative blood loss, hospital length of stay (LOS), and overall (OPC) and major postoperative complications (MPCs; defined as Clavien–Dindo > 3) were assessed between groups. Results: Of the 2434 patients included, 756 remained after PSM with 252 in each group. The three groups had similar baseline clinicopathological characteristics. The median follow-up was 32 months. Kaplan–Meier and log-rank tests demonstrated similar RFS, CSS, and OS between groups. BRFS was found to be superior with ORNU. Using multivariable regression analyses, LRNU and RRNU were independently associated with worse BRFS (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22–2.28, p = 0.001 and HR 1.73, 95%CI 1.22–2.47, p = 0.002, respectively). LRNU and RRNU were associated with a significantly shorter LOS (beta −1.1, 95% CI −2.2–0.02, p = 0.047 and beta −6.1, 95% CI −7.2–5.0, p < 0.001, respectively) and fewer MPCs (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.31–0.79, p = 0.003 and OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.16–0.46, p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: In this large international cohort, we demonstrated similar RFS, CSS, and OS among ORNU, LRNU, and RRNU. However, LRNU and RRNU were associated with significantly worse BRFS, but a shorter LOS and fewer MPCs.

Purpose The optimal timing of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is unclear. We hypothesized that a genomic classifier (GC) would provide prognostic and predictive insight into the development of clinical metastases in men receiving post-RP RT and inform decision making. Patients and Methods GC scores were calculated from 188 patients with pT3 or margin-positive prostate cancer, who received post-RP RT at Thomas Jefferson University and Mayo Clinic between 1990 and 2009. The primary end point was clinical metastasis. Prognostic accuracy of the models was tested using the concordance index for censored data and decision curve analysis. Cox regression analysis tested the relationship between GC and metastasis. Results The cumulative incidence of metastasis at 5 years after RT was 0%, 9%, and 29% for low, average, and high GC scores, respectively (P = .002). In multivariable analysis, GC and pre-RP prostate-specific antigen were independent predictors of metastasis (both P < .01). Within the low GC score (< 0.4), there were no differences in the cumulative incidence of metastasis comparing patients who received adjuvant or salvage RT (P = .79). However, for patients with higher GC scores (≥ 0.4), cumulative incidence of metastasis at 5 years was 6% for patients treated with adjuvant RT compared with 23% for patients treated with salvage RT (P < .01). Conclusion In patients treated with post-RP RT, GC is prognostic for the development of clinical metastasis beyond routine clinical and pathologic features. Although preliminary, patients with low GC scores are best treated with salvage RT, whereas those with high GC scores benefit from adjuvant therapy. These findings provide the first rational selection of timing for post-RP RT.

Purpose The role of adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) in treating patients with pN1 prostate cancer is controversial. We tested the hypothesis that the impact of aRT on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in these individuals is related to tumor characteristics. Methods We evaluated 1,107 patients with pN1 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy and anatomically extended pelvic lymph node dissection between 1988 and 2010 at two tertiary care centers. All patients received adjuvant hormonal therapy with or without aRT. Regression tree analysis stratified patients into risk groups on the basis of their tumor characteristics and the corresponding CSM rate. Cox regression analysis tested the relationship between aRT and CSM rate, as well as overall mortality (OM) rate in each risk group separately. Results Overall, 35% of patients received aRT. At multivariable analysis, aRT was associated with more favorable CSM rate (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; P < .001). However, when patients were stratified into risk groups, only two groups of men benefited from aRT: (1) patients with positive lymph node (PLN) count ≤ 2, Gleason score 7 to 10, pT3b/pT4 stage, or positive surgical margins (HR, 0.30; P = .002); and (2) patients with PLN count of 3 to 4 (HR, 0.21; P = .02), regardless of other tumor characteristics. These results were confirmed when OM was examined as an end point. Conclusion The beneficial impact of aRT on survival in patients with pN1 prostate cancer is highly influenced by tumor characteristics. Men with low-volume nodal disease (≤ two PLNs) in the presence of intermediate- to high-grade, non–specimen-confined disease and those with intermediate-volume nodal disease (three to four PLNs) represent the ideal candidates for aRT after surgery.