Treatment of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in Belgium: a real world data analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AAP) and docetaxel have proven their efficacy in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in clinical trials. However, real-world data are scarce. The goal of this study is to evaluate real-world data on the efficacy and safety of these therapies in mHSPC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of 93 patients from 21 different centres were retrospectively reviewed. Primary and secondary endpoints were radiographic and PSA progression-free survival (RPFS - PSA-PFS) and cancer specific and overall survival (CSS - OS), respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. Differences in oncological outcome and AEs were evaluated between three treatment groups: ADT only (N=26) - ADT + AAP (N=48) - ADT + docetaxel (N=19). Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier statistics. RESULTS: Median RPFS was 13 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9-17) for ADT only, 21 months (95% CI: 19-23) for ADT + AAP and 12 months (95% CI: 11-14) for ADT + docetaxel (p = 0.004). The 1-year PSA-PFS, CSS and OS were 73.5%, 90.7% and 88.7%, respectively, with no significant differences between the three groups. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were not observed more frequently. CONCLUSION: Retrospective real-world data show a significantly longer RPFS for mHSPC patients treated with ADT + AAP compared to ADT only or ADT + docetaxel at short-term follow-up. This can aid in counselling of mHSPC patients in daily clinical practice.

Effect of clinical examination and anatomical location on native arteriovenous fistula maturation rate in high risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Maximal use of native arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) for patients on hemodialysis therapy remains a clinical challenge. Primary failure rates remain high with risk factors such as female gender, diabetes mellitus, lower arm AVF and higher age. We wondered if a strategy of careful clinical examination prior to AVF creation and a preference towards an upper arm AVF in case of doubt about the quality of the vein in patients with any of the above mentioned risk factors, would lead to better maturation rates. METHODS: The records of all patients who received an AVF between January 2005 and December 2009 at our University Hospitals Leuven were studied retrospectively. Demographic data, comorbidity, fistula characteristics, fistula maturation and fistula complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 344 patients enrolled, 156 (45.3%) received a lower arm AVF and 188 (54.7%) an upper arm AVF. Two hundred and seventy-six (80.2%) fistulas had a normal maturation. Lower arm AVF was a significant risk factor for non-maturation in this series (73.1% versus 86.2% ; p = 0,0024). Female gender, diabetes and high age were not, but female gender showed a significant difference in distribution in upper arm versus lower arm fistulas (62.40% versus 37.6% ; p = 0,0218). CONCLUSIONS: Careful clinical examination prior to upper or lower arm AVF creation together with the integration of risk assessment in the planning of AVF is worthwhile. A preference towards upper arm fistulas if major risk factors are -present can improve overall maturation rates and lead to the same maturation rates as in the overall dialysis population. Therefore, the presence of risk factors for non-maturation should not lead to the underuse of native AVFs.