» Articles » PMID: 29990573

National Trends in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Validation of Medicare Claims-based Algorithms

Overview
Journal Urology
Specialty Urology
Date 2018 Jul 11
PMID 29990573
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To better describe the real-world use of active surveillance. Active surveillance is a preferred management option for low-risk prostate cancer, yet its use outside of high-volume institutions is poorly understood. We created multiple claims-based algorithms, validated them using a robust clinical registry, and applied them to Medicare claims to describe national utilization.

Materials And Methods: We identified men with prostate cancer from 2012-2014 in a 100% sample of Michigan Medicare data and linked them with the Michigan Urologic Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) registry. Using MUSIC treatment assignment as the standard, we determined the performance of 8 claims-based algorithms to identify men on active surveillance. We selected 3 algorithms (the most sensitive, the most specific, and a balanced algorithm incorporating age and comorbidity) and applied them to a 20% national Medicare sample to describe national trends.

Results: We identified 1186 men with incident prostate cancer and completely linked data. Eight algorithms were tested with sensitivity ranging from 23.5% to 88.2% and specificity ranging from 93.5% to 99.1%. We found that the use of surveillance for men with incident prostate cancer increased from 2007 to 2014, nationally. However, among all men in the population, there was a large decrease in the rate of prostate cancer diagnosis and an increased or stable rate in the use of active surveillance, depending on the algorithm used. Less than 25% of men on active surveillance underwent a confirmatory prostate biopsy.

Conclusion: We describe the performance of claims-based algorithms to identify active surveillance.

Citing Articles

Commercial prices and their influence on urology practices: Prostate cancer care among men with Medicare.

Srivastava A, Liu X, Maganty A, Kaufman S, Shay A, Oerline M Cancer. 2024; 131(1):e35633.

PMID: 39501423 PMC: 11734219. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.35633.


Patient perspectives on factors influencing active surveillance adherence for low-risk prostate cancer: A qualitative study.

Subramanian L, Hawley S, Skolarus T, Rankin A, Fetters M, Witzke K Cancer Med. 2023; 13(1):e6847.

PMID: 38151901 PMC: 10807559. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6847.


Comparing Active Surveillance and Watchful Waiting With Radical Treatment Using Machine Learning Models Among Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Hu S, Chang C, Snyder J, Deshmukh V, Newman M, Date A JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2023; 7:e2300083.

PMID: 37988640 PMC: 10681553. DOI: 10.1200/CCI.23.00083.


Association Between Urologist Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Performance and Quality of Prostate Cancer Care.

Maganty A, Kaufman S, Oerline M, Faraj K, Caram M, Shahinian V Urol Pract. 2023; 11(1):207-214.

PMID: 37748132 PMC: 10842494. DOI: 10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000463.


Use of expectant management based on prostate cancer risk and health status: How far are we from a risk-adapted approach?.

Spratte B, Tan H, Zambrano I, Basak R, Filson C, Jacobs B Urol Oncol. 2023; 41(7):323.e17-323.e25.

PMID: 37149430 PMC: 11228925. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.04.006.


References
1.
Klabunde C, Potosky A, Legler J, Warren J . Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 53(12):1258-67. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00256-0. View

2.
Carter H, Kettermann A, Warlick C, Metter E, Landis P, Walsh P . Expectant management of prostate cancer with curative intent: an update of the Johns Hopkins experience. J Urol. 2007; 178(6):2359-64. PMC: 4390051. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.039. View

3.
Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, Pickles T, Kakehi Y, Rannikko A . Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol. 2012; 63(4):597-603. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.005. View

4.
Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P . Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2013; 190(5):1742-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.054. View

5.
Womble P, Montie J, Ye Z, Linsell S, Lane B, Miller D . Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014; 67(1):44-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.024. View