Epidemiology of Urological Cancers in Brazil: Trends in Mortality Rates Over More Than Two Decades.

BACKGROUND: Considering the socioeconomic disparities and inequalities observed in the healthcare resources among the Brazilian regions, we aimed to analyze the mortality trends of urological cancers in Brazil to identify areas with differential risks. METHODS: Deaths related to prostate (PCa), bladder (BCa), kidney (KC), penile (PeC), and testis (TCa) cancers from 1996 to 2019 were retrieved from the Mortality Information System database (Brazil). Geographic and temporal patterns were analyzed using age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs). A joinpoint regression model was used to identify changes in the trends and calculate the average annual percentage change (AAPC) for each region. RESULTS: In Brazil, the ASMRs (per 100,000 persons/year) were 11.76 for PCa; 1.37, BCa; 1.13, KC; 0.33, and PeC; 0.26, TCa over the period. Increasing mortality trends were registered for BCa (AAPC = 0.45 in men; 0.57 in women), KC (AAPC = 2.03 in men), PeC (AAPC = 1.01), and TCa (AAPC = 2.06). The PCa mortality presented a significant reduction after 2006. The Northeast and North regions showed the highest increases in the PCa mortality. The South registered the highest ASMRs for BCa and KC, but the highest increasing trends occurred in the men from the Northeast. The North presented the highest ASMR for PeC, while the South registered the highest ASMR for TCa. CONCLUSION: Differences among regions may be partly explained by disparities in the healthcare systems. Over the study period, the North and Northeast regions presented more discrepant mortality rates. Efforts should be made to ensure access to the healthcare resources for people at risk, particularly in these regions.

Should obesity be associated with worse urinary continence outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? a propensity score matching analysis

ABSTRACT Purpose: To analyze the association between obesity and urinary incontinence rate in men submitted to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a high-volume cancer center. Materials and Methods: We reported 1.077 men who underwent RARP as the primary treatment for localized prostate cancer from 2013 to 2017. Patients were classified as non-obese (normal BMI or overweight) or obese men (BMI ≥30kg/m2). They were grouped according to the age, PSA level, D'Amico risk group, Gleason score, ASA classification, pathological stage, prostate volume, salvage/adjuvant radiotherapy, perioperative complications, and follow-up time. Urinary continence was defined as the use of no pads. For the analysis of long-term urinary continence recovery, we conducted a 1:1 propensity-score matching to control confounders. Results: Among the obese patients, mean BMI was 32.8kg/m2, ranging 30 - 45.7kg/m2. Only 2% was morbidly obese. Obese presented more comorbidities and larger prostates. Median follow-up time was 15 months for the obese. Complications classified as Clavien ≥3 were reported in 5.6% of the obese and in 4.4% of the non-obese men (p=0.423). Median time for continence recovery was 4 months in both groups. In this analysis, HR was 0.989 for urinary continence recovery in obese (95%CI=0.789 - 1.240; p=0.927). Conclusions: Obese can safely undergo RARP with similar continence outcomes comparing to the non-obese men when performed by surgeons with a standardized operative technique. Future studies should perform a subgroup analysis regarding the association of obesity with other comorbidities, intending to optimize patient counseling.

Should obesity be associated with worse urinary continence outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? a propensity score matching analysis.

PURPOSE: To analyze the association between obesity and urinary incontinence rate in men submitted to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a high-volume cancer center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reported 1.077 men who underwent RARP as the primary treatment for localized prostate cancer from 2013 to 2017. Patients were classified as non-obese (normal BMI or overweight) or obese men (BMI ≥30kg/m2). They were grouped according to the age, PSA level, D'Amico risk group, Gleason score, ASA classification, pathological stage, prostate volume, salvage/adjuvant radiotherapy, perioperative complications, and follow-up time. Urinary continence was defined as the use of no pads. For the analysis of long-term urinary continence recovery, we conducted a 1:1 propensity-score matching to control confounders. RESULTS: Among the obese patients, mean BMI was 32.8kg/m2, ranging 30 - 45.7kg/m2. Only 2% was morbidly obese. Obese presented more comorbidities and larger prostates. Median follow-up time was 15 months for the obese. Complications classified as Clavien ≥3 were reported in 5.6% of the obese and in 4.4% of the non-obese men (p=0.423). Median time for continence recovery was 4 months in both groups. In this analysis, HR was 0.989 for urinary continence recovery in obese (95%CI=0.789 - 1.240; p=0.927). CONCLUSIONS: Obese can safely undergo RARP with similar continence outcomes comparing to the non-obese men when performed by surgeons with a standardized operative technique. Future studies should perform a subgroup analysis regarding the association of obesity with other comorbidities, intending to optimize patient counseling.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Cancer Screening in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignancies among men worldwide. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening shows uncertain benefits and harms from clinical and economic perspectives, resulting in an important impact on healthcare systems. Because of nonstandardized studies and substantial differences among populations, data are still inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to carry out long-term cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis on the PSA-screened population from the service provider's perspective in the Brazilian population. METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis using clinical outcomes obtained from 9692 men enrolled in the PSA screening program. Prostate cancer treatments, 5-year follow-up outcomes, and all related costs were examined. Data were compared with a nonscreened prostate cancer population to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). ICER and ICUR were compared with the Brazilian-established willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (WTP = R$ 114 026.55). RESULTS: A total of 251 of 9692 men had a diagnosis of prostate cancer (2.6%), of which 90% had localized disease. Two hundred and five patients were treated as follows: surgery (45.37%); radiation therapy (11.22%); radiation plus androgen deprivation therapy (21.95%); active surveillance (13.17%); exclusive androgen deprivation therapy (7.32%); and watchful waiting (0.98%). Two simulated cohorts were compared based on screening and nonscreening groups. Values obtained were-ICER of R$ 44 491.39 per life saved and ICUR of R$ 10 851.56 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained-below the Brazilian WTP threshold and showed cost-effectiveness and cost-utility advantages. CONCLUSION: According to the Brazilian WTP, PSA screening is a cost-effective policy from a hospital and long-term perspective and should have more standardized studies developed in different populations and economies.

Prostate Cancer Screening in Brazil: a single center experience in the public health system

ABSTRACT Purpose: Incidence and mortality of prostate cancer (PCa) are still increasing in developing countries. Limited access to the health system or more aggressive disease are potential reasons for this. Ethnic and social differences in developed countries seem to make inappropriate to extrapolate data from other centers. We aim to report the epidemiological profile of a PSA-screened population from a cancer center in Brazil. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively selected 9.692 men enrolled in a PCa prevention program, comprising total PSA level and digital rectal examination at the first appointment, associated with complementary tests when necessary. Men aged over 40 years-old were included after shared decision-making process. Prostate biopsy (TRUS) was performed when clinically suspected for PCa. After the diagnosis, patients underwent appropriate treatment. Results: TRUS was performed in 5.5% of men and PCa incidence was 2.6%. Overall ratio between number of patients who needed to be screened in order to diagnose one cancer was 38.9 patients, with 2.1 biopsies performed to diagnose a cancer. Positive predictive value (PPV) of TRUS biopsy in this strategy was 47.2%, varying from 38.5% (<50 years-old) to 60% (>80 years-old). We evidenced 70 patients (27.9%) classified as low risk tumors, 74 (29.5%) as intermediate risk, and 107 (42.6%) as high-risk disease. Conclusions: PSA-screening remains controversial in literature. In front of a huge miscegenated people and considering the big proportion of high-risk PCa, even in young men diagnosed with the disease, it is imperative to inform patients and health providers about these data particularities in Brazil.

Prostate Cancer Screening in Brazil: a single center experience in the public health system.

PURPOSE: Incidence and mortality of prostate cancer (PCa) are still increasing in developing countries. Limited access to the health system or more aggressive disease are potential reasons for this. Ethnic and social differences in developed countries seem to make inappropriate to extrapolate data from other centers. We aim to report the epidemiological profile of a PSA-screened population from a cancer center in Brazil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively selected 9.692 men enrolled in a PCa prevention program, comprising total PSA level and digital rectal examination at the first appointment, associated with complementary tests when necessary. Men aged over 40 years-old were included after shared decision-making process. Prostate biopsy (TRUS) was performed when clinically suspected for PCa. After the diagnosis, patients underwent appropriate treatment. RESULTS: TRUS was performed in 5.5% of men and PCa incidence was 2.6%. Overall ratio between number of patients who needed to be screened in order to diagnose one cancer was 38.9 patients, with 2.1 biopsies performed to diagnose a cancer. Positive predictive value (PPV) of TRUS biopsy in this strategy was 47.2%, varying from 38.5% (<50 years-old) to 60% (>80 years-old). We evidenced 70 patients (27.9%) classified as low risk tumors, 74 (29.5%) as intermediate risk, and 107 (42.6%) as high-risk disease. CONCLUSIONS: PSA-screening remains controversial in literature. In front of a huge miscegenated people and considering the big proportion of high-risk PCa, even in young men diagnosed with the disease, it is imperative to inform patients and health providers about these data particularities in Brazil.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a single cancer center experience.

Prostate cancer (PCa) treatment has been greatly impacted by the robotic surgery. The economics literature about PCa is scarce. We aim to carry-out cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of the robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) using the "time-driven activity-based cost" methodology. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy in 2013 were retrospectively analyzed in a cancer center over a 5-year period. Fifty-six patients underwent RALP and 149 patients underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). The amounts were subject to a 5% discount as correction of monetary value considering time elapsed. Calculation of the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICER) related to events avoided and the Incremental Cost-Utility Ratio (ICUR) related to "QALY saved" were performed. QALY was performed using values of utility and "disutility" weights from the "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry". Hypothetical cohorts were simulated with 1000 patients in each group, based on the treatment outcomes. Total and average costs were R$1,903,671.93, and R$12,776.32 for the RRP group, and R$1,373,987.26, and R$24,535.49 for the RALP group, respectively. The costs to treat the hypothetical cohorts were R$10,010,582.35 for RRP, and R$19,224,195.90 for RALP. ICER calculation evidenced R$9,213,613.55 of difference between groups. ICUR was R$ 22,690.83 per QALY saved. Limitations were the lack of cost-effectiveness analyses related to re-hospitalization rates and complications, single center perspective, and currency-translation differences. Medical fees were not included. RALP showed advantages in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility over RRP in the long term. Despite the increased costs to the introduction of robotic technology, its adoption should be encouraged due to the gains.

Pelvic Pseudoaneurysm as a Cause of Severe Hematuria After Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To alert the medical society regarding that hematuria after radical prostatectomy can be caused by pelvic pseudoaneurysm. METHODS: Case report of a 61-year-old male underwent extraperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. He was readmitted on the 15th POD due to gross hematuria with resolution after bladder irrigation. It returned on the 21st POD. RESULTS: The CT angiography evidenced the pseudoaneurysm of the left internal iliac artery. Selective embolization was effectively performed, with no additional bleeding or pelvic ischemia. Endovascular therapy is the preferred method of treatment. CONCLUSION: The pelvic pseudoaneurysm is a rare, but serious complication that can cause severe bleeding. In our experience, we had 3 cases of persistent hematuria caused by pelvic pseudoaneurysm after 1810 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Comparative Analysis of Functional Outcomes Between Two Different Techniques After 1088 Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomies in a High-Volume Cancer Center: A Clipless Approach.

Introduction: Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) has largely replaced the open technique worldwide as the first surgical modality for prostate cancer. We aim at describing the experience of RARP at a high-volume single cancer center, proposing a modified technique of nerve-sparing prostatectomy and comparing functional outcomes throughout our experience. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1088 patients divided into group 1 (operated from May 2013 to November 2014), submitted to the standard transperitoneal robotic technique, and group 2 (operated from December 2014 to December 2017), submitted to extraperitoneal RARP with complete anterior peri-prostatic preservation technique and a clipless approach (no use of clips and cautious use of bipolar energy). We constructed a retrospective 1:2 matched-pair analysis considering age, body mass index, D'Amico risk classification, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification as matching criteria. Univariate and multivariate Cox logistic regression analysis were used to identify predictors related to recovery of continence and erectile function. Results: Groups were comparable by clinical and demographic variables. There was no significant difference in overall continence rate. Mean time for continence recovery was 6.6 months in group 1 and 5.8 months in group 2. Erectile function recovery, with or without drugs, in 12 months was described in 53.5% in group 1 and 75% in group 2. Potency recovery was significantly earlier in group 2. Conclusions: In our experience, extraperitoneal RARP with complete anterior peri-prostatic preservation and a clipless approach is a feasible and reproducible technique. It demonstrated improved erectile function recovery and similar continence results. Prospective multicenter studies are needed to validate these results.

Prognostic factors in patients with penile carcinoma and inguinal lymph node metastasis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify prognostic factors in patients with penile carcinoma and confirmed lymph node metastasis. METHODS: Patients were selected from a historical series of patients with penile carcinoma. An experienced pathologist reviewed all cases. Information regarding the total number of lymph nodes excised, the number of positive lymph nodes and the presence of extranodal extension were used. Lymph node ratio was categorized as <0.15 and >0.15. RESULTS: The 5-year recurrence-free survival and disease-specific survival rates were 55.3% and 64.1%, respectively. Lymphovascular invasion, lymph node ratio and pN status influenced survival rates in univariate analysis. Lymphovascular invasion and lymph node ratio remained as independent predictors of disease-specific survival and recurrence-free survival in the multivariate analysis. A risk stratification of death and tumor recurrence was observed when patients were grouped into three categories: absence of risk factors; the presence of one risk factor; and the presence of two or more risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of one or more of the following parameters is correlated with a significantly higher risk of death and tumor recurrence in patients with penile carcinoma and inguinal lymph node metastasis: extranodal extension, lymph node ratio >0.15 and lymphovascular invasion.