» Articles » PMID: 25644324

Who Bears the Greatest Burden of Aggressive Treatment of Indolent Prostate Cancer?

Overview
Journal Am J Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2015 Feb 4
PMID 25644324
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The long-term prostate cancer-specific survival for patients initially managed with active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer ranges from 97% to 100%. We characterized factors that are associated with aggressive treatment with radical prostatectomy or radiation for indolent prostate cancer (defined as screening-detected, low-risk disease).

Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program was used to extract a cohort of 39,803 men diagnosed with prostate-specific antigen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer (clinical category T1c, Gleason score ≤6, and prostate-specific antigen <10) from 2004 to 2010. After socioeconomic profiles were generated from county-linked education and income data, multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether there were any factors associated with high rates of aggressive treatment.

Results: The rate of aggressive treatment among all men with indolent prostate cancer was 64.3%. Greater rates of aggressive treatment were experienced by men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men (P < .001 for all cases). The increased adjusted odds for receipt of aggressive therapy were 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-1.32; P < .001), 1.26 (95% CI, 1.21-1.32; P < .001), and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.80-1.97; P < .001) for men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men, respectively, compared with men with low socioeconomic status, non-Caucasian men, and unmarried men, respectively.

Conclusions: Although men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men often receive the highest quality health care and have the best outcomes for many cancers, it seems that they are most at risk for the avoidable potential harms of aggressive treatment of indolent prostate cancer. Future policy should encourage more stringent guidelines for deferred treatment and culturally and sociodemographically competent counseling of active surveillance.

Citing Articles

Geographical Variations in Prostate Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review of International Evidence.

Dasgupta P, Baade P, Aitken J, Ralph N, Chambers S, Dunn J Front Oncol. 2019; 9:238.

PMID: 31024842 PMC: 6463763. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00238.


Quality of Life Among Black Prostate Cancer Survivors: An Integrative Review.

Dickey S, Ogunsanya M Am J Mens Health. 2018; 12(5):1648-1664.

PMID: 29926761 PMC: 6142144. DOI: 10.1177/1557988318780857.


Utilization and predictors of expectant management among elderly men with low-and intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer in U.S. urological practice.

Tsai H, Philips G, Taylor K, Kowalczyk K, Huai-Ching K, Potosky A Urol Pract. 2017; 4(2):132-139.

PMID: 28808670 PMC: 5553913. DOI: 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.05.005.


Validation of prostate-specific antigen laboratory values recorded in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries.

Adamo M, Boten J, Coyle L, Cronin K, Lam C, Negoita S Cancer. 2016; 123(4):697-703.

PMID: 27783399 PMC: 5293616. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30401.


Does true Gleason pattern 3 merit its cancer descriptor?.

Miah S, Ahmed H, Freeman A, Emberton M Nat Rev Urol. 2016; 13(9):541-8.

PMID: 27530265 DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2016.141.