METHODS: The one-day meeting in July 2023 brought together 27 experts from 14 APAC countries. The meeting covered five topics: (1) Intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer; (2) Management of newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; (3) Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; (4) Homologous recombination repair mutation testing; (5) Management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Pre- and post-symposium polling gathered APAC-specific responses to APCCC consensus questions and insights on current practices and challenges in the APAC region.
RESULTS: APAC APCCC highlights APAC-specific considerations in an evolving landscape of diagnostic technologies and treatment innovations for advanced prostate cancer. While new technologies are available in the region, cost and reimbursement continue to influence practice significantly. Individual patient considerations, including the impact of chemophobia on Asian patients, also influence decision-making.
CONCLUSION: The use of next-generation imaging, genetic testing, and new treatment combinations is increasing the complexity and duration of prostate cancer management. Familiarity with new diagnostic and treatment options is growing in the APAC region. Insights highlight the continued importance of a multidisciplinary approach that includes nuclear medicine, genetic counseling, and quality-of-life expertise. The APAC APCCC meeting provides an important opportunity to share practice and identify APAC-specific issues and considerations in areas of low evidence where clinical experience is growing.
FINDINGS: Differences in genetics, environment, lifestyle, diet and culture are all likely to influence the management of advanced prostate cancer in the APAC region when compared with the rest of the world. When considering the strong APCCC 2017 recommendation for the use of upfront docetaxel in metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer, the panel noted possible increased toxicity in Asian men receiving docetaxel, which would affect this recommendation in the APAC region. Although androgen receptor-targeting agents appear to be well tolerated in Asian men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, access to these drugs is very limited for financial reasons across the region. The meeting highlighted that cost and access to contemporary treatments and technologies are key factors influencing therapeutic decision-making in the APAC region. Whilst lower cost/older treatments and technologies may be an option, issues of culture and patient or physician preference mean, these may not always be acceptable. Although generic products can reduce cost in some countries, costs may still be prohibitive for lower-income patients or communities. The panellists noted the opportunity for a coordinated approach across the APAC region to address issues of access and cost. Developments in technologies and treatments are presenting new opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Differences in genetics and epidemiology affect the side-effect profiles of some drugs and influence prescribing.
CONCLUSIONS: As the field continues to evolve, collaboration across the APAC region will be important to facilitate relevant research and collection and appraisal of data relevant to APAC populations. In the meantime, the APAC APCCC 2018 meeting highlighted the critical importance of a multidisciplinary team-based approach to treatment planning and care, delivery of best-practice care by clinicians with appropriate expertise, and the importance of patient information and support for informed patient choice.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the global impact of COVID-19 on urological providers and the provision of urological patient care.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted from March 30, 2020 to April 7, 2020. A 55-item questionnaire was developed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on various aspects of urological services. Target respondents were practising urologists, urology trainees, and urology nurses/advanced practice providers.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the degree of reduction in urological services, which was further stratified by the geographical location, degree of outbreak, and nature and urgency of urological conditions. The secondary outcome was the duration of delay in urological services.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 1004 participants responded to our survey, and they were mostly based in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Worldwide, 41% of the respondents reported that their hospital staff members had been diagnosed with COVID-19 infection, 27% reported personnel shortage, and 26% had to be deployed to take care of COVID-19 patients. Globally, only 33% of the respondents felt that they were given adequate personal protective equipment, and many providers expressed fear of going to work (47%). It was of concerning that 13% of the respondents were advised not to wear a surgical face mask for the fear of scaring their patients, and 21% of the respondents were advised not to discuss COVID-19 issues or concerns on media. COVID-19 had a global impact on the cut-down of urological services, including outpatient clinic appointments, outpatient investigations and procedures, and urological surgeries. The degree of cut-down of urological services increased with the degree of COVID-19 outbreak. On average, 28% of outpatient clinics, 30% of outpatient investigations and procedures, and 31% of urological surgeries had a delay of >8 wk. Urological services for benign conditions were more affected than those for malignant conditions. Finally, 47% of the respondents believed that the accumulated workload could be dealt with in a timely manner after the COVID-19 outbreak, but 50% thought the postponement of urological services would affect the treatment and survival outcomes of their patients. One of the limitations of this study is that Africa, Australia, and New Zealand were under-represented.
CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 had a profound global impact on urological care and urology providers. The degree of cut-down of urological services increased with the degree of COVID-19 outbreak and was greater for benign than for malignant conditions. One-fourth of urological providers were deployed to assist with COVID-19 care. Many providers reported insufficient personal protective equipment and support from hospital administration.
PATIENT SUMMARY: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has led to significant delay in outpatient care and surgery in urology, particularly in regions with the most COVID-19 cases. A considerable proportion of urology health care professionals have been deployed to assist in COVID-19 care, despite the perception of insufficient training and protective equipment.
METHODS: In this case-control study, we analyzed data on adult patients aged 18 years and above hospitalized for COVID-19 infection with matched hospitalized controls. The demographic, clinical data and anxiety measures using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 questionnaire were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: 86.6% in the COVID-19 group had anxiety, significantly higher than 13.4% in the control group (p = 0.001). The COVID-19 group was significantly associated with the GAD-7 severity (p = 0.001). The number of COVID-19 patients in the mild, moderate, and severe anxiety groups was 48 (84.2%), 37 (86%), and 18 (94.7%), respectively. Multiple logistic regression showed significant predictors for anxiety, including COVID-19 diagnosis and neurological symptoms. Anxiety was found 36.92 times higher in the patients with COVID-19 compared to those without COVID-19 (OR 36.92;95% CI 17.09, 79.78, p = 0.001). Patients with neurological symptoms were at risk of having anxiety (OR 2.94; 95% CI 1.03, 8.41, p = 0.044).
DISCUSSION: COVID-19 patients experience a significant disruption in psychosocial functioning due to hospitalization. The burden of anxiety is notably high, compounded by a diagnosis of COVID-19 itself and neurological symptomatology. Early psychiatric referrals are warranted for patients at risk of developing anxiety symptoms.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7476 patients with routine health check-up data who underwent prostate biopsies from January 2008 to December 2021 in eight referral centres in Asia were screened. After data pre-processing and cleaning, 5037 patients and 117 features were analyzed. Seven AI-based algorithms were tested for feature selection and seven AI-based algorithms were tested for classification, with the best combination applied for model construction. The APAC score was established in the CH cohort and validated in a multi-centre cohort and in each validation cohort to evaluate its generalizability in different Asian regions. The performance of the models was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), calibration plot, and decision curve analyses.
RESULTS: Eighteen features were involved in the APCA score predicting HGPCa, with some of these markers not previously used in prostate cancer diagnosis. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.76 (95% CI:0.74-0.78) in the multi-centre validation cohort and the increment of AUC (APCA vs. PSA) was 0.16 (95% CI:0.13-0.20). The calibration plots yielded a high degree of coherence and the decision curve analysis yielded a higher net clinical benefit. Applying the APCA score could reduce unnecessary biopsies by 20.2% and 38.4%, at the risk of missing 5.0% and 10.0% of HGPCa cases in the multi-centre validation cohort, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The APCA score based on routine health check-ups could reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies without additional examinations in Asian populations. Further prospective population-based studies are warranted to confirm these results.