The Impact of the Ongoing COVID-19 Epidemic on the Increasing Risk of Adverse Pathology in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy.

We aimed to assess whether the ongoing course of the COVID-19 epidemic has been associated with an increased risk of adverse pathology (AP) findings in prostate cancer (PC) patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP). We performed a retrospective data analysis which included 408 consecutive, non-metastatic, previously untreated PC patients who underwent RP in our institution between March 2020 and September 2021. Patients were divided into two equally numbered groups in regard to the median surgery date (Early Epidemic [EE] and Late Epidemic [LE]) and compared. Adverse pathology was defined as either grade group (GG) ≥ 4, pT ≥ 3a or pN+ at RP. Patients in the LE group demonstrated significantly higher rates of AP than in the EE group (61 vs. 43% overall and 50 vs. 27% in preoperative non-high-risk subgroup, both p < 0.001), mainly due to higher rates of upgrading. On multivariable analysis, consecutive epidemic week (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.03, p = 0.009) as well as biopsy GG ≥ 2 and a larger prostate volume (mL) were associated with AP in non-high-risk patients. The study serves as a warning call for increased awareness of risk underassessment in contemporarily treated PC patients.

Novel fusion sarcomas including targetable NTRK and ALK.

BACKGROUND: Challenging emerging entities with distinctive molecular signatures may benefit from algorithms for diagnostic work-up. METHODS: Fusion sarcomas (2020-2021, during pandemic) were diagnosed by clinicoradiology, morphology, phenotype, and next-generation sequencing (NGS). RESULTS: Six fusion sarcomas in two males and four females involved the chest-wall, neck, or extremities; ages ranged 2-73, median 18 years. Sizes ranged 5.3-25.0, median 9.1 cm. These include high grade 1) TPR-NTRK1 of proximal femur with a larger rounded soft tissue mass, previously considered osteosarcoma yet without convincing tumor matrix. A pathologic fracture necessitated emergency hemipelvectomy (NED) and 2) novel KANK1-NTRK2 sarcoma of bone and soft tissue with spindled pleomorphic to epithelioid features (AWD metastases). 3) Novel ERC1-ALK unaligned fusion, a low grade infiltrative deep soft tissue hand sarcoma with prominent-vascularity, myopericytoid/lipofibromatosis-like ovoid cells, and collagenized stroma, was successfully treated with ALK-inhibitor (Crizotinib), avoiding amputation. These NTRK and ALK tumors variably express S100 and CD34 and were negative for SOX10. 4) and 5) CIC-DUX4 round cell tumors (rapid metastases/demise), one with COVID superinfection, were previously treated as Ewing sarcoma. These demonstrated mild pleomorphism and necrosis, variable myxoid change and CD99 reactivity, and a distinctive dot-like-Golgi WT1 immunostaining pattern. 6) A chest wall/thoracic round cell sarcoma, focal CD34/ keratins/CK7, revealed nuclear-STAT6, STAT6-NAB2 by NGS, confirming malignant solitary fibrous tumor, intermediate-risk-stratification (AWD metastases). CONCLUSIONS: Recent fusion sarcomas include new KANK1-NTRK2 and ERC1-ALK, the latter successfully treated by targeted-therapy. ALK/NTRK fusion partners TPR and KANK1 suggest unusual high-grade morphology/behavior. Clinicoradiologic, morphologic, and phenotypic algorithms can prompt molecular-targeted immunostains or NGS for final classification and promising inhibitor therapy.

Assessment of Prostate Cancer Treatment Among Black and White Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, racial/ethnic minority communities disproportionately experienced poor outcomes; however, the association of the pandemic with prostate cancer (PCa) care is unknown. Objective: To assess the association between race and PCa care delivery for Black and White patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, regional, collaborative, retrospective cohort study compared prostatectomy rates between Black and White patients with untreated nonmetastatic PCa during the COVID-19 pandemic (269 patients from March 16 to May 15, 2020) and prior (378 patients from March 11 to May 10, 2019). Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostatectomy rates. Results: Of the 647 men with nonmetastatic PCa, 172 (26.6%) were non-Hispanic Black men, and 475 (73.4%) were non-Hispanic White men. Black men were significantly less likely to undergo prostatectomy during the pandemic compared with White patients (1 of 76 [1.3%] vs 50 of 193 [25.9%]; P < .001), despite similar COVID-19 risk factors, biopsy Gleason grade groups, and comparable prostatectomy rates prior to the pandemic (17 of 96 [17.7%] vs 54 of 282 [19.1%]; P = .75). Black men had higher median prostate-specific antigen levels prior to biopsy (8.8 ng/mL [interquartile range, 5.3-15.2 ng/mL] vs 7.2 ng/mL [interquartile range, 5.1-11.1 ng/mL]; P = .04). A linear combination of regression coefficients with an interaction term for year demonstrated an odds ratio for likelihood of surgery of 0.06 (95% CI, 0.01-0.35; P = .002) for Black patients and 1.41 (95% CI, 0.81-2.44; P = .23) for White patients during the pandemic compared with prior to the pandemic. Changes in surgical volume varied by site (from a 33% increase to complete shutdown), with sites that experienced the largest reduction in cancer surgery caring for a greater proportion of Black patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large multi-institutional regional collaborative cohort study, the odds of PCa surgery were lower among Black patients compared with White patients during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although localized PCa does not require immediate treatment, the lessons from this study suggest systemic inequities within health care and are likely applicable across medical specialties. Public health efforts are needed to fully recognize the unintended consequence of diversion of cancer resources to the COVID-19 pandemic to develop balanced mitigation strategies as viral rates continue to fluctuate.

Association between definitive chemoradiotherapy wait-time and survival in locally-advanced cervical cancer: Implications during the coronavirus pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The current coronavirus pandemic caused a significant decrease in cancer-related encounters resulting in a delay in treatment of cancer patients. The objective of this study was to examine the survival effect of delay in starting concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (CCRT) in women with locally-advanced cervical cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study querying the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2016. Women with stage IB2-IVA squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, or adenosquamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix who received definitive CCRT with known wait-time for CCRT initiation after cancer diagnosis were eligible (N=13,617). Cox proportional hazard regression model with restricted cubic spline transformation was fitted to assess the association between CCRT wait-time and all-cause mortality in multivariable analysis. RESULTS: The median wait-time to start CCRT was 6 (IQR 4-8) weeks. In a multivariable analysis, older age, non-Hispanic black and Hispanic ethnicity, recent year of diagnosis, Medicaid and uninsured status, medical comorbidities, and absence of nodal metastasis were associated with longer CCRT wait-time (P<.05). Women with aggressive tumor factors (poorer differentiation, large tumor size, nodal metastasis, and higher cancer stage) were more likely to have a short CCRT wait-time (P<.05). After controlling for the measured covariates, CCRT wait-time of 6.1-9.8 weeks was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to a wait-time of 6 weeks. Similar association was observed when the cohort was stratified by histology, cancer stage, tumor size, or brachytherapy use. CONCLUSION: An implication of this study for the current coronavirus pandemic is that in the absence of aggressive tumor factors, a short period of wait-time to start definitive CCRT may not be associated with increased risk of mortality in women with locally-advanced cervical cancer.

First Surgical National Consensus Conference of the Italian Breast Surgeons association (ANISC) on breast cancer management in neoadjuvant setting: Results and summary.

RATIONALE: On October 15th, 2020, the first Surgical National Consensus Conference on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was promoted by the Italian Association of Breast Surgeons (ANISC). METHOD: The Consensus Conference was entirely held online due to anti-Covid-19 restrictions and after an introductory four lectures held by national and international experts in the field, a total of nine questions were presented and a digital "real-time" voting system was obtained. A consensus was reached if 75% or more of all panelists agreed on a given question. RESULTS: A total of 202 physicians, from 76 different Italian Breast Centers homogeneously distributed throughout the Italian country, participated to the Conference. Most participants were surgeons (75%). Consensus was reached for seven out of the nine considered topics, including management of margins and lymph nodes at surgery, and there was good correspondence between the 32 "Expert Panelists" and the "Participants" to the Conference. Consensus was not achieved regarding the indications to NACT for high-grade luminal-like breast tumors, and the need to perform an axillary lymph node dissection in case of micrometastases in the sentinel lymph node after NACT. CONCLUSIONS: NACT is a topic of major interest among surgeons, and there is need to develop shared guidelines. While a Consensus was obtained for most issues presented at this Conference, controversies still exist regarding indications to NACT in luminal B-like tumors and management of lymph node micrometastases. There is need for clinical studies and analysis of large databases to improve our knowledge on this subject.

Challenging retrovesical mass in men: report of a rare liposarcoma case with concurrent COVID-19 infection.

We describe a case of retrovesical liposarcoma in a male patient with concurrent COVID-19. A 50-year-old man had lower urinary tract symptoms and dull pain along his right gluteus. Due to COVID-19 infection, management was delayed. During self-isolation, the patient developed urinary retention and his pain level was an eight on the Visual Analogue Scale. A urinary catheter and an epidural catheter were inserted without any difficulty. Abdominal-pelvic MRI revealed a retrovesical mass suspected of liposarcoma with clear borders from surrounding organs. Following two consecutive negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests, we proceeded with surgery. Histopathology was dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Postoperatively, the patient suffered reactivation of COVID-19, and he was eventually discharged after two consecutive negative results on the PCR test on Post Operative Day (POD)-10. Retrovesical dedifferentiated liposarcoma is rare and considered as high-grade liposarcoma. Although surgery may exacerbate COVID-19 infection, surgical resection of symptomatic high-grade sarcoma is prioritised and performed as soon as no infection detected.

Surgical Delay and Pathological Outcomes for Clinically Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Importance: There is a lack of data evaluating the association of surgical delay time (SDT) with outcomes in patients with localized, high-risk prostate cancer. Objective: To investigate the association of SDT of radical prostatectomy and final pathological and survival outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the US National Cancer Database (NCDB) and identified all patients with clinically localized (cT1-2cN0cM0) high-risk prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 who underwent radical prostatectomy. Data analyses were performed from April 1 to April 12, 2020. Exposures: SDT was defined as the number of days between the initial cancer diagnosis and radical prostatectomy. SDT was categorized into 5 groups: 31 to 60, 61 to 90, 91 to 120, 121 to 150, and 151 to 180 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were predetermined as adverse pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy, including pT3-T4 disease, pN-positive disease, and positive surgical margin. The adverse pathological score (APS) was defined as an accumulated score of the 3 outcomes (0-3). An APS of 2 or higher was considered a separate outcome to capture cases with more aggressive pathological features. The secondary outcome was overall survival. Results: Of the 32 184 patients included in the study, the median (interquartile range) age was 64 (59-68) years, and 25 548 (79.4%) were non-Hispanic White. Compared with an SDT of 31 to 60 days, longer SDTs were not associated with higher risks of having any adverse pathological outcomes (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.80-1.12; P = .53), pT3-T4 disease (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.17; P = .87), pN-positive disease (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.59-1.06; P = .12), positive surgical margin (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17), or APS greater than or equal to 2 (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; P = .17). Longer SDT was also not associated with worse overall survival (for SDT of 151-180 days, hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79-1.59, P = .53). Subgroup analyses performed for patients with very high-risk disease (primary Gleason score 5) and sensitivity analyses with SDT considered as a continuous variable yielded similar results. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy within 180 days of diagnosis for high-risk prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer could be safely delayed up to 6 months after diagnosis.

Delayed Radical Prostatectomy is Not Associated with Adverse Oncologic Outcomes: Implications for Men Experiencing Surgical Delay Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: The 2019 novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has forced many health care organizations to divert efforts and resources to emergent patient care, delaying many elective oncologic surgeries. We investigated an association between delay in radical prostatectomy and oncologic outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer in the National Cancer Database undergoing radical prostatectomy from 2010 to 2016. Immediate radical prostatectomy was defined as radical prostatectomy within 3 months of diagnosis, while delayed radical prostatectomy was analyzed in 3-month intervals up to 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to test for associations between levels of delayed radical prostatectomy and outcomes of interest (adverse pathology, upgrading on radical prostatectomy, node positive disease and post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments) compared with men undergoing immediate radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: We identified 128,062 men with intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. After adjustment, we did not appreciate a significant difference in odds of adverse pathology, upgrading, node positive disease or post-radical prostatectomy secondary treatments between men treated with immediate radical prostatectomy and any level of delay up to 12 months. Subgroup analysis of men with Grade Group 4 and 5 prostate cancer did not demonstrate an association between delayed radical prostatectomy and worse oncologic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In the National Cancer Database delayed radical prostatectomy was not associated with early adverse oncologic outcomes at radical prostatectomy. These results may provide reassurance to patients and urologists balancing care in the current pandemic.

How to manage early-stage follicular lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: Early-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) is characterized by good prognosis and can be cured with involved-field radiotherapy (IF-RT) in most cases. PET scan is a milestone of diagnostic work-up, with the aim of identifying a truly localized disease; however, staging in most of the studies was without PET. AREAS COVERED: We have searched in MEDLINE (inclusive dates 1994-2020) data about localized FL management. While high-quality evidence is lacking, current guidelines recommend IFRT or involved-site RT as first-line treatment in limited stages FL. Since a significant proportion of disease relapse occurred in non-irradiated areas, it has been hypothesized that occult disease could be present at diagnosis and could persist after RT, contributing to relapse. Available treatment options include watch-and-wait, chemotherapy, RT plus chemo- or chemo-immunotherapy, and RT combined with rituximab (R). EXPERT OPINION: RT combined with chemotherapy could increase PFS, but a clear OS benefit is lacking and toxic effects could be unacceptable. A promising strategy is represented by R combined with IF-RT, with low relapse rate outside the radiation fields and without the toxicity reported with chemotherapy. The study of prognostic factors in PET-staged patients, the reduction of RT fields and doses, and a response-adapted strategy represent new perspectives to investigate.

Timing and delay of radical prostatectomy do not lead to adverse oncologic outcomes: results from a large European cohort at the times of COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The current COVID-19 pandemic is transforming our urologic practice and most urologic societies recommend to defer any surgical treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. It is unclear whether a delay between diagnosis and surgical management (i.e., surgical delay) may have a detrimental effect on oncologic outcomes of PCa patients. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of surgical delay on oncologic outcomes. METHODS: Data of 926 men undergoing radical prostatectomy across Europe for intermediate and high-risk PCa according to EAU classification were identified. Multivariable analysis using binary logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard model tested association between surgical delay and upgrading on final pathology, lymph-node invasion (LNI), pathological locally advanced disease (pT3-4 and/or pN1), need for adjuvant therapy, and biochemical recurrence. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate BCR-free survival after surgery as a function of surgical delay using a 3 month cut-off. RESULTS: Median follow-up and surgical delay were 26 months (IQR 10-40) and 3 months (IQR 2-5), respectively. We did not find any significant association between surgical delay and oncologic outcomes when adjusted to pre- and post-operative variables. The lack of such association was observed across EAU risk categories. CONCLUSION: Delay of several months did not appear to adversely impact oncologic results for intermediate and high-risk PCa, and support an attitude of deferring surgery in line with the current recommendation of urologic societies.

ENDOCRINOLOGY IN THE TIME OF COVID-19: Clinical management of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs).

In viral pandemics, most specifically Covid-19, many patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), including phaeochromocytomas, paragangliomas and medullary thyroid carcinoma, may develop Covid-19 in a mild or severe form, or be concerned about the influence of viral infection relative to their anti-tumoral therapy. In general, newly presenting patients should be assessed, and patients recently receiving chemotherapy, targeted therapy or radionuclide therapy, or showing tumour growth, should be closely followed. For previously diagnosed patients, who have indolent disease, some delay in routine follow-up or treatment may not be problematic. However, patients developing acute secretory syndromes due to functional neuroendocrine neoplasms (such as of the pancreas, intestine or lung), phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas, will require prompt treatment. Patients with life-threatening Covid-19-related symptoms should be urgently treated and long-term anti-tumoral treatments may be temporarily delayed. In patients with especially aggressive NENs, a careful judgement should be made regarding the severity of any Covid-19 illness, tumour grade, and the immunosuppressant effects of any planned chemotherapy, immunotherapy (e.g. interferon-alpha), targeted therapy or related treatment. In other cases, especially patients with completely resected NENs, or who are under surveillance for a genetic disorder, a telephone or delayed consultation may be in order, balancing the risk of a delay against that of the possible development of Covid-19.

A Systematic Review on Guidelines and Recommendations for Urology Standard of Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: The first case of the new coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), was identified in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. Since then, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was reclassified as a pandemic, and health systems around the world have faced an unprecedented challenge. OBJECTIVE: To summarize guidelines and recommendations on the urology standard of care during the COVID-19 pandemic. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Guidelines and recommendations published between November 2019 and April 17, 2020 were retrieved using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. This was supplemented by searching the web pages of international urology societies. Our inclusion criteria were guidelines, recommendations, or best practice statements by international urology organizations and reference centers about urological care in different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of 366 titles identified, 15 guidelines met our criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 15 guidelines, 14 addressed emergency situations and 12 reported on assessment of elective uro-oncology procedures. There was consensus on postponing radical prostatectomy except for high-risk prostate cancer, and delaying treatment for low-grade bladder cancer, small renal masses up to T2, and stage I seminoma. According to nine guidelines that addressed endourology, obstructed or infected kidneys should be decompressed, whereas nonobstructing stones and stent removal should be rescheduled. Five guidelines/recommendations discussed laparoscopic and robotic surgery, while the remaining recommendations focused on outpatient procedures and consultations. All recommendations represented expert opinions, with three specifically endorsed by professional societies. Only the European Association of Urology guidelines provided evidence-based levels of evidence (mostly level 3 evidence). CONCLUSIONS: To make informed decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic, there are multiple national and international guidelines and recommendations for urologists to prioritize the provision of care. Differences among the guidelines were minimal. PATIENT SUMMARY: We performed a systematic review of published recommendations on urological practice during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which provide guidance on prioritizing the timing for different types of urological care.