Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Following an Elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen Test

Socioeconomic inequality in prostate cancer diagnostics, primary treatment, rehabilitation, and mortality in Sweden

We designed a nationwide study to investigate the association between socioeconomic factors (household income and education) and different aspects of prostate cancer care, considering both individual- and neighbourhood-level variables. Data were obtained from Prostate Cancer data Base Sweden (PCBaSe), a research database with data from several national health care registers including clinical characteristics and treatments for nearly all men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden. Four outcomes were analysed: use of pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 2018-2020 (n = 11,843), primary treatment of high-risk non-metastatic disease in 2016-2020 (n = 6633), rehabilitation (≥2 dispensed prescriptions for erectile dysfunction within 1 year from surgery in 2016-2020, n = 6505), and prostate cancer death in 7770 men with high-risk non-metastatic disease diagnosed in 2010-2016. Unadjusted and adjusted odds and hazard ratios (OR/HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Adjusted odds ratio (ORs) comparing low versus high individual education were 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.83) for pre-biopsy MRI, 0.66 (0.54-0.81) for primary treatment, and 0.82 (0.69-0.97) for rehabilitation. HR gradients for prostate cancer death were significant on unadjusted analysis only (low vs. high individual education HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17-1.70); co-variate adjustments markedly attenuated the gradients (low vs. high individual education HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.35). Generally, neighbourhood-level analyses showed weaker gradients over the socioeconomic strata, except for pre-biopsy MRI. Socioeconomic factors influenced how men were diagnosed with prostate cancer in Sweden but had less influence on subsequent specialist care. Neighbourhood-level socioeconomic data are more useful for evaluating inequality in diagnostics than in later specialist care.

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging utilization and its relationship with advanced prostate cancer detection

BACKGROUND

The rise in advanced prostate cancer has coincided with increased use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), leading to the hypothesis that this increase in surveillance registries is an artifact of more sensitive imaging tools. We assessed the association between regional variation in prostate MRI and advanced prostate cancer diagnoses.

METHODS

We utilized SEER-Medicare data (2004-2015), including men > 65 diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. The predictor variable was the utilization of prostate MRI in each hospital referral region (HRR, representing regional healthcare markets). We compared the proportion of disease recorded as locally advanced or of regional risk group (cT3, cT4, and cN1) which would plausibly have been detected by prostate MRI. We conducted adjusted multivariable analysis and performed correlation analysis with Spearman rank coefficient at the level of the HRR. Sensitivity analysis for years 2011 to 2015 was conducted.

RESULTS

Of 98,921 men diagnosed, 4.01% had locally advanced or regional disease. The median prostate MRI utilization rate was 4.58% (IQR [3.03%, 8.12%]). Adjusted multivariable analysis revealed no statistically significant correlation between MRI utilization and proportion of advanced prostate cancer (aOR = 1.01, 95% CI, [0.99,1.03]) in each region. The correlation between MRI usage and advanced diagnosis was not significant (Spearman Ρ = 0.09, P = 0.4). Sensitivity analysis conducted between 2011 and 2015 showed similar results (aOR = 1.008, 95% CI, [0.989, 1.027]; Spearman Ρ = 0.16, P = 0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

During our study period, HRR-level utilization of MRI was not associated with higher incidences of advanced prostate cancer. This suggests the rising advanced prostate cancer diagnoses observed in this period are unlikely an artifact of greater sensitivity of modern imaging tests, but potentially due to other factors such as changes in screening or risk factors. With increased utilization and evolving techniques in recent years, the association between MRI and advanced prostate cancer detection warrants continued monitoring.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Prostate cancer screening in African American men: a review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in African American men, yet prostate cancer screening regimens in this group are poorly guided by existing evidence, given underrepresentation of African American men in prostate cancer screening trials. It is critical to optimize prostate cancer screening and early detection in this high-risk group because underdiagnosis may lead to later-stage cancers at diagnosis and higher mortality while overdiagnosis may lead to unnecessary treatment.

METHODS

We performed a review of the literature related to prostate cancer screening and early detection specific to African American men to summarize the existing evidence available to guide health-care practice.

RESULTS

Limited evidence from observational and modeling studies suggests that African American men should be screened for prostate cancer. Consideration should be given to initiating screening of African American men at younger ages (eg, 45-50 years) and at more frequent intervals relative to other racial groups in the United States. Screening intervals can be optimized by using a baseline prostate-specific antigen measurement in midlife. Finally, no evidence has indicated that African American men would benefit from screening beyond 75 years of age; in fact, this group may experience higher rates of overdiagnosis at older ages.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for prostate cancer screening in African American men is limited by the lack of large, randomized studies. Our literature search supported the need for African American men to be screened for prostate cancer, for initiating screening at younger ages (45-50 years), and perhaps screening at more frequent intervals relative to men of other racial groups in the United States.

Radiation Therapy Summary of the AUA/ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to develop a summary of recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer based on the American Urologic Association/ ASTRO Guideline on Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer.

METHODS

The American Urologic Association and ASTRO convened a multidisciplinary, expert panel to develop recommendations based on a systematic literature review using an a priori defined consensus-building methodology. The topics covered were risk assessment, staging, risk-based management, principles of management including active surveillance, surgery, radiation, and follow-up after treatment. Presented are recommendations from the guideline most pertinent to radiation oncologists with an additional statement on health equity, diversity, and inclusion related to guideline panel composition and the topic of clinically localized prostate cancer.

SUMMARY

Staging, risk assessment, and management options in prostate cancer have advanced over the last decade and significantly affect shared decision-making for treatment management. Current advancements and controversies discussed to guide staging, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations include the use of advanced imaging and tumor genomic profiling. An essential active surveillance strategy includes prostate-specific antigen monitoring and periodic digital rectal examination with changes triggering magnetic resonance imaging and possible biopsy thereafter and histologic progression or greater tumor volume prompting consideration of definitive local treatment. The panel recommends against routine use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for patients with prostate cancer after prostatectomy with negative nodes and an undetectable prostate-specific antigen, while acknowledging that patients at highest risk of recurrence were relatively poorly represented in the 3 largest randomized trials comparing adjuvant RT to early salvage and that a role may exist for adjuvant RT in selected patients at highest risk. RT for clinically localized prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, with new trial results, therapeutic combinations, and technological advances. The recommendation of moderately hypofractionated RT has not changed, and the updated guideline incorporates a conditional recommendation for the use of ultrahypofractionated treatment. Health disparities and inequities exist in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer across the continuum of care that can influence guideline concordance.

Prostate Cancer, Race, and Health Disparity: What We Know

ABSTRACT

Prostate cancer (PCa) in African American men is one of the most common cancers with a great disparity in outcomes. The higher incidence and tendency to present with more advanced disease have prompted investigators to postulate that this is a problem of innate biology. However, unequal access to health care and poorer quality of care raise questions about the relative importance of genetics versus social/health injustice. Although race is inconsistent with global human genetic diversity, we need to understand the sociocultural reality that race and racism impact biology. Genetic studies reveal enrichment of PCa risk alleles in populations of West African descent and population-level differences in tumor immunology. Structural racism may explain some of the differences previously reported in PCa clinical outcomes; fortunately, there is high-level evidence that when care is comparable, outcomes are comparable.

Disparities in prostate cancer

Despite substantial advances in early detection/prevention and treatments, and improved outcomes in recent decades, prostate cancer continues to disproportionately affect Black men and is the secondleading cause of cancer death in this subgroup. Black men are substantially more likely to develop prostate cancer and are twice as likely to die from the disease compared with White men. In addition, Black men are younger at diagnosis and face a higher risk of aggressive disease relative to White men. Striking racial disparities endure along the continuum of prostate cancer care, including screening, genomic testing, diagnostic procedures, and treatment modalities. The underlying causes of these inequalities are complex and multifactorial and involve biological factors, structural determinants of equity (i.e., public policy, structural and systemic racism, economic policy), social determinants of health (including income, education, and insurance status, neighborhood/physical environment, community/social context, and geography), and health care factors. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial disparities in prostate cancer and to propose actionable recommendations to help address these inequities and narrow the racial gap.

Radiologists' Contribution to Variation in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men With Prostate MRI

OBJECTIVE

Assess radiologists' contribution to variation in clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI).

METHODS

This institutional review board-approved, retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary, academic, National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center with a multidisciplinary prostate cancer program. Men undergoing mpMRI examinations from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019, with elevated PSA (≥4 ng/mL) and biopsy within 6 months pre- or post-MRI or prostatectomy within 6 months post-mpMRI were included. Univariate and multivariable hierarchical logistic regression assessed impact of patient, provider, mpMRI examination, mpMRI report, and pathology factors on the diagnosis of Grade Group ≥ 2 csPCa.

RESULTS

Study cohort included 960 MRIs in 928 men, mean age 64.0 years (SD ± 7.4), and 59.8% (555 of 928) had csPCa. Interpreting radiologist was not significant individually (P > .999) or combined with mpMRI ordering physician and physician performing biopsy or prostatectomy (P = .41). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 2 (odds ratio [OR] 0.18, P = .04), PI-RADS category 4 (OR 2.52, P < .001), and PI-RADS category 5 (OR 4.99, P < .001) assessment compared with no focal lesion; PSA density of 0.1 to 0.15 ng/mL/cc (OR 2.46, P < .001), 0.15 to 0.2 ng/mL/cc (OR 2.77, P < .001), or ≥0.2 ng/mL/cc (OR 4.52, P < .001); private insurance (reference = Medicare, OR 0.52, P = .001), and unambiguous extraprostatic extension on mpMRI (OR 2.94, P = .01) were independently associated with csPCa. PI-RADS 3 assessment (OR 1.18, P = .56), age (OR 0.99, P = .39), and African American race (OR 0.90, P = .75) were not.

DISCUSSION

Although there is known in-practice variation in radiologists' interpretation of mpMRI, in our multidisciplinary prostate cancer program we found no significant radiologist-attributable variation in csPCa detection.

Racial disparities in Black men with prostate cancer: A literature review

Black men are disproportionately affected by prostate cancer (PCa), with earlier presentation, more aggressive disease, and higher mortality rates versus White men. Furthermore, Black men have less access to PCa treatment and experience longer delays between diagnosis and treatment. In this review, the authors discuss the factors contributing to racial disparities and present solutions to improve access to care and increase clinical trial participation among Black men with PCa. Racial disparities observed among Black men with PCa are multifaceted, evolving from institutional racism. Cultural factors include generalized mistrust of the health care system, poor physician-patient communication, lack of information on PCa and treatment options, fear of PCa diagnosis, and perceived societal stigma of the disease. In the United States, geographic trends in racial disparities have been observed. Economic factors, e.g., cost of care, recovery time, and cancer debt, play an important role in racial disparities observed in PCa treatment and outcomes. Racial diversity is often lacking in genomic and precision medicine studies. Black men are largely underrepresented in key phase 3 PCa trials and may be less willing to enroll in clinical trials due to lack of awareness, lack of diversity in clinical trial research teams, and bias of health care providers to recommend clinical research. The authors propose solutions to address these factors that include educating clinicians and institutions on the barriers Black men experience, increasing the diversity of health care providers and clinical research teams, and empowering Black men to be involved in their treatment, which are keys to creating equity for Black men with PCa. LAY SUMMARY: Prostate cancer negatively affects Black men more than men of other races. The history of segregation and mistreatment in the health care system may contribute to mistrust among Black men. Outcomes are worse for Black men because they are less likely to be screened or to receive treatment for prostate cancer. Black men also are unlikely to participate in clinical research, making it difficult for investigators to understand how Black men are affected by prostate cancer. Suggestions for addressing these differences include teaching physicians and nurses about the issues Black men experience getting treatment and improving how Black men get information on prostate cancer.

Genomic Testing in Localized Prostate Cancer Can Identify Subsets of African Americans With Aggressive Disease

BACKGROUND

Personalized genomic classifiers have transformed the management of prostate cancer (PCa) by identifying the most aggressive subsets of PCa. Nevertheless, the performance of genomic classifiers to risk classify African American men is thus far lacking in a prospective setting.

METHODS

This is a prospective study of the Decipher genomic classifier for National Comprehensive Cancer Network low- and intermediate-risk PCa. Study-eligible non-African American men were matched to African American men. Diagnostic biopsy specimens were processed to estimate Decipher scores. Samples accrued in NCT02723734, a prospective study, were interrogated to determine the genomic risk of reclassification (GrR) between conventional clinical risk classifiers and the Decipher score.

RESULTS

The final analysis included a clinically balanced cohort of 226 patients with complete genomic information (113 African American men and 113 non-African American men). A higher proportion of African American men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network-classified low-risk (18.2%) and favorable intermediate-risk (37.8%) PCa had a higher Decipher score than non-African American men. Self-identified African American men were twice more likely than non-African American men to experience GrR (relative risk [RR] = 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02 to 4.90; P = .04). In an ancestry-determined race model, we consistently validated a higher risk of reclassification in African American men (RR = 5.26, 95% CI = 1.66 to 16.63; P = .004). Race-stratified analysis of GrR vs non-GrR tumors also revealed molecular differences in these tumor subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Integration of genomic classifiers with clinically based risk classification can help identify the subset of African American men with localized PCa who harbor high genomic risk of early metastatic disease. It is vital to identify and appropriately risk stratify the subset of African American men with aggressive disease who may benefit from more targeted interventions.

Variation and Disparity in the Use of Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification Tools in the United States

In this review we summarize evidence from US studies examining variation in the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and tissue-based gene expression tests (genomic tests), focusing on sources of regional and racial variation. Large observational studies indicate that prostate MRI and genomic testing vary significantly at the regional level as measured across multiple geographic boundaries. Similarly, there is lower use of prostate MRI among Black versus White-identified patients Black in comparison to those who are White, as well as evidence of less use among Hispanic and Asian versus White patients. These findings indicate opportunities to address modifiable sources of practice variation in localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we found that use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and genetic testing differed by region, and race, with less prostate MRI use among Black versus White patients. These findings can help raise awareness about gaps in access to new prostate cancer tools.

Health Disparities in Prostate Cancer and Approaches to Advance Equitable Care

The American Cancer Society estimates approximately 268,490 new cases of prostate cancer and approximately 34,500 deaths caused by prostate cancer in the United States for 2022. Globally, a total of 1,414,259 new cases of prostate cancer and 375,304 related deaths were reported in 2020. Well-documented health disparities and inequities exist along the continuum of care for prostate cancer management-from screening to diagnostic and staging work-up, surveillance, and treatment-ultimately impacting clinical outcomes. This session-based article discusses innovative patient-centered approaches to advance equitable prostate cancer care. It begins with a review of domestic health disparities in diagnostic imaging and radiotherapy for prostate cancer, and it summarizes barriers and solutions to achieving health equity, such as equity metrics and practice quality improvement projects. Next, a global perspective is provided that describes approaches to address financial and geographic barriers to prostate cancer care, including specific examples of strategies that emphasize the use of the cheapest method of care delivery while maintaining outcomes for drug delivery and radiotherapy.

Real-world use of MRI for risk stratification prior to prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND

The utilization of MRI to risk stratify elevated PSA prior to prostate biopsy has been inconsistently adopted and varies considerably by practice setting. This study aims to evaluate the usage and performance of MRI as an advanced risk stratification tool of elevated PSA prior to biopsy and identify factors associated with differential utilization of MRI at a large academic setting with ready access to 3T multiparametric MRI of the prostate.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study of 2900 men presenting with elevated PSA 2-20 ng/mL from 2018 through 2021 was conducted. We analyzed trends in MRI utilization and outcomes of prostate biopsy by MRI usage. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to calculate odds ratios to identify patient- and provider-level predictors of MRI usage.

RESULTS

Rates of prebiopsy MRI utilization increased from 56% in 2018 to 89% in 2021 (p < 0.001). Prebiopsy MRI led to biopsy avoidance in 31% of men. MRI usage enhanced detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by 13% and reduced identification of Gleason Grade Group 1 disease by 3% and negative biopsies by 10% (p < 0.001). Men who received MRI were more likely to be younger than 75 years in age and have private or Medicare insurance, PSA >4 ng/mL, and PHI >27. In both univariate and multivariate analysis, black race and Medicaid insurance were associated with reduced MRI utilization (all p < 0.001). Urologic provider was an independent predictor of MRI usage (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of MRI as a risk stratification tool for elevated PSA rose during this 4-year study period. Men who self-identify as black or men with Medicaid coverage have diminished rates of MRI usage. Considerable provider-level variability in MRI use was observed. Future research aimed at identifying factors affecting implementation of MRI as a routine risk assessment tool is warranted.

A narrative review of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) implementation on screening, detection, and the overall accuracy for prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in American men following skin cancer, with approximately one in eight men being diagnosed during their lifetime. Over the past several decades, the treatment of prostate cancer has evolved rapidly, so too has screening. Since the mid-2010s, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–guided biopsies or ‘targeted biopsies’ has been a rapidly growing topic of clinical research within the field of urologic oncology. The aim of this publication is to provide a review of biparametric MRI (bpMRI) utilization for the diagnosis of prostate cancer and a comparison to multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). Through single-centered studies and meta-analysis across all identified pertinent published literature, bpMRI is an effective tool for the screening and diagnosis of prostate cancer. When compared with the diagnostic accuracy of mpMRI, bpMRI identifies prostate cancer at comparable rates. In addition, when omitting dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) protocol to the MRI, patients incur reduced costs and shorter imaging time while providers can offer more tests to their patient population.

Grade Migration of Prostate Cancer in the United States During the Last Decade

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PC) screening guidelines have changed over the last decade to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment of low-grade disease. We sought to examine and attempt to explain how changes in screening strategies have impacted temporal trends in Gleason grade group (GG) PC at diagnosis and radical prostatectomy pathology.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry database, we identified 438 432 men with newly diagnosed PC during 2010-2018. Temporal trends in incidence of GG at biopsy, radical prostatectomy pathology, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and metastasis at diagnosis were examined. The National Health Interview Survey database was examined to evaluate trends in PSA-screening rates, and a literature review evaluating magnetic resonance imaging and biomarkers utilization during this period was performed.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2018, the incidence of low-grade PC (GG1) decreased from 52 to 26 cases per 100 000 (P < .001). The incidence of GG1 as a proportion of all PC decreased from 47% to 32%, and the proportion of GG1 at radical prostatectomy pathology decreased from 32% to 10% (P < .001). However, metastases at diagnosis increased from 3.0% to 5.2% (P < .001). During 2010-2013, PSA screening rates in men aged 50-74 years declined from 39 to 32 per 100 men and remained stable. Utilization rates of magnetic resonance imaging and biomarkers modestly increased from 7.2% in 2012 to 17% in 2019 and 1.3% in 2012 to 13% in 2019, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a significant decrease in the diagnosis and treatment of GG1 PC between 2010 and 2018. Changes in PSA screening practices appear as the primary contributor. Public health efforts should be directed toward addressing the increase in the diagnoses of metastatic PC.