Factors influencing treatment of veterans with advanced prostate cancer

Comparing Black and White Patients in Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer and Survival in an Equal Access Health System

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in prostate cancer treatment and survival in the U.S. have been attributed to differences in access to care and medical insurance. We aimed to compare treatment and survival of advanced prostate cancers between White and Black men in the equal access Military Health System (MHS).

METHODS

We accessed the MilCanEpi database to study a cohort of non-Hispanic White and Black men diagnosed with stage III or IV prostate cancer between 1998 and 2014 in the MHS. The racial groups were compared in receiving curative treatment of radical prostatectomy (RP) only, RP with (neo)adjuvant radiation or hormone therapy, radiation only, or combination radiation and hormone therapy; and overall survival using multivariable regression models.

RESULTS

The study included 1476 White and 531 Black men. Overall, there was no racial difference in receiving any curative treatment (AOR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.67, 1.08 for Black vs. White). By treatment type, Black men were statistically as likely to receive RP only (AOR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.67, 1.14), radiation only (AOR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.49, 1.34), or combination radiation and hormone therapy (AOR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.71, 1.78) but statistically less likely to receive RP with (neo)adjuvant treatment (AOR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.37, 0.86) relative to no curative treatment compared to White men. The difference in RP with (neo)adjuvant treatment was also statistically significant among patients with stage III tumors, but not stage IV. Survival was similar overall (AHR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.88, 1.42 for Black vs. White) and when evaluated by tumor stage.

CONCLUSIONS

In the MHS, the overall likelihood to receive any treatment for advanced prostate cancers and survival was similar between races, which might result from universal health care. Racial differences in receipt of RP with (neo)adjuvant treatment, especially for patients with stage III prostate cancer, may be related to factors other than access to care and warrants further research.

Survival by first-line therapy and prognostic group among men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is a heterogeneous disease with prognoses varying from months to years at time of castration-resistant diagnosis. Optimal first-line therapy for those with different prognoses is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of men in a national healthcare delivery system receiving first-line therapy for mCRPC (abiraterone, enzalutamide, docetaxel, or ketoconazole) from 2010 to 2017, with follow-up through 2019. Using commonly drawn prognostic labs at start of mCRPC therapy (hemoglobin, albumin, and alkaline phosphatase), we categorized men into favorable, intermediate, or poor prognostic groups depending on whether they had none, one to two, or all three laboratory values worse than designated laboratory cutoffs. We used Kaplan-Meier methods to examine prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression-free and overall survival (OS) according to prognostic group and first-line therapy, and multivariable cox regression to determine variables associated with survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 4135 patients, median PSA progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.6-7.3), and median OS 18.8 months (95% CI 18.0-19.6), ranging from 5.7 months (95% CI 4.8-7.0) in the poor prognosis group to 31.3 months (95% CI 29.7-32.9) in the favorable group. OS was similar regardless of initial treatment received for favorable and intermediate groups, but worse for those in the poor prognostic group who received ketoconazole (adjusted hazard ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.2-3.6). PSA PFS was worse for those who received ketoconazole compared to abiraterone across all prognostic groups (favorable HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34-2.31; intermediate HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.41-2.25; poor HR 8.01, 95% CI 2.93-21.9).

CONCLUSION

Commonly drawn labs at mCRPC treatment start may aid in predicting survival and response to therapies, potentially informing discussions with care teams. First-line treatment selection impacts disease progression for all men with mCRPC regardless of prognostic group, but impacted OS only for men with poor prognosis at treatment start.

Emerging racial disparities among Medicare beneficiaries and Veterans with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that Black men receive worse prostate cancer care than White men. This has not been explored in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) in the current treatment era.

METHODS

We evaluated treatment intensification (TI) and overall survival (OS) in Medicare (2015-2018) and Veterans Health Administration (VHA; 2015-2019) patients with mCSPC, classifying first-line mCSPC treatment as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + novel hormonal therapy; ADT + docetaxel; ADT + first-generation nonsteroidal antiandrogen; or ADT alone.

RESULTS

We analyzed 2226 Black and 16,071 White Medicare, and 1020 Black and 2364 White VHA patients. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.81) and without Medicaid (adjusted OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.57-0.87). Medicaid patients had less TI irrespective of race. OS was worse for Black vs White Medicare patients overall (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% CI 1.09-1.31) and without Medicaid (adjusted HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.27). OS was worse in Medicaid vs without Medicaid, with no significant OS difference between races. TI was significantly lower for Black vs White VHA patients (adjusted OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.92), with no significant OS difference between races.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline-recommended TI was low for all patients with mCSPC, with less TI in Black patients in both Medicare and the VHA. Black race was associated with worse OS in Medicare but not the VHA. Medicaid patients had less TI and worse OS than those without Medicaid, suggesting poverty and race are associated with care and outcomes.

Determinants of Bone-Modifying Agent Prescribing for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in a National Health Care Delivery System

PURPOSE

Despite guidelines recommending bone-modifying agents (BMAs) to decrease skeletal-related events (SREs) in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), BMAs are underutilized. In this retrospective cohort study, we report the factors associated with BMA use in a national health care delivery system.

METHODS

We used the Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse to identify men with mCRPC between 2010 and 2017. BMA prescribing frequency was evaluated, and the association between patient- and disease-specific factors with BMA use was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 3,980 men identified with mCRPC (mean age 73.5 years, 29% Black), 47% received a BMA; median time to BMA from start of mCRPC treatment was 102 days. Factors associated with BMA use included previous BMA use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 7.81 [95% CI, 6.48 to 9.47]), diagnosis code for bone metastases (aOR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.46]), and concomitant corticosteroid use (aOR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.82]). Decreased BMA use was associated with advancing age (aOR, 0.85 per 10 years [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.92]), Charlson comorbidity index ≥2 (aOR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.93]), Black race (aOR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98]), and decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; aOR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.11 to 0.32] for eGFR 0-29 mL/minutes; aOR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91] for 30-59 mL/minutes).

CONCLUSION

Patients who are older, Black, or have more comorbidities are less likely to receive guideline concordant care to prevent SREs. These observations highlight the unique challenges of caring for patients with mCRPC and the need for future studies to increase BMA use in these populations.

Outcomes after definitive radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer in a national health care delivery system

PURPOSE

Accurate information regarding real-world outcomes after contemporary radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer is important for shared decision-making. Clinically relevant end points at 10 years among men treated within a national health care delivery system were examined.

METHODS

National administrative, cancer registry, and electronic health record data were used for patients undergoing definitive radiation therapy with or without concurrent androgen deprivation therapy within the Veterans Health Administration from 2005 to 2015. National Death Index data were used through 2019 for overall and prostate cancer-specific survival and identified date of incident metastatic prostate cancer using a validated natural language processing algorithm. Metastasis-free, prostate cancer-specific, and overall survival using Kaplan-Meier methods were estimated.

RESULTS

Among 41,735 men treated with definitive radiation therapy, the median age at diagnosis was 65 years and median follow-up was 8.7 years. Most had intermediate (42%) and high-risk (33%) disease, with 40% receiving androgen deprivation therapy as part of initial therapy. Unadjusted 10-year metastasis-free survival was 96%, 92%, and 80% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease. Similarly, unadjusted 10-year prostate cancer-specific survival was 98%, 97%, and 90% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease. The unadjusted overall survival was lower across increasing disease risk categories at 77%, 71%, and 62% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide population-based 10-year benchmarks for clinically relevant end points, including metastasis-free survival, among patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radiation therapy using contemporary techniques. The survival rates for high-risk disease in particular suggest that outcomes have recently improved.

Real-World Treatment Patterns Among French Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Under Abiraterone or Enzalutamide

PURPOSE

Using large French retrospective study cohort of chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients (mCRPC; n = 10,308) comparing survival between patients who initiated abiraterone (ABI; 64%) and those initiating enzalutamide (ENZ; 36%), the present objective was to describe treatment patterns in the 2 years following initiation.

METHOD

Using the national health data system (SNDS) from 2014 to 2018, we first explored the number of treatment lines, and secondly, patterns of patient management using state sequence analysis; cluster analyses were performed on the 0 to 12 month and 13 to 24 month periods. Age, Charlson score, and duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were obtained for each cluster in the first year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Patients with only 1 treatment line accounted for 52%. In the 0 to 12 month sequence analysis, the main clusters among ABI/ENZ new users involved patients who continued the initial treatment (54% of 65% respectively) and discontinued active treatment (14.5% for both). Less than 2 years exposure to ADT prior to ABI/ENZ initiation was frequently observed for noncontrolled mCRPC, as shown in the death and switch from ABI/ENZ to docetaxel clusters. The clusters for a switch ABI/ENZ to ENZ/ABI involved 6% to 11% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggested fairly similar patterns between ABI and ENZ initiation. The cluster of patients with active treatment discontinuation needs to be further investigated, as well as factors influencing therapeutic choice. Better understanding for the use of second-generation hormone therapy in mCRPC in real life, could improve its implementation by clinicians in the early stages of prostate cancer.

Mental health care utilization among men with castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving abiraterone or enzalutamide

BACKGROUND

Abiraterone and enzalutamide are castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) therapies with potentially distinct associations with mental health symptoms given their differing antiandrogen targets.

METHODS

We used national Veterans Health Administration data to identify patients with CRPC who received first-line abiraterone or enzalutamide from 2010 to 2017. Using Poisson regression, we compared outpatient mental health encounters per 100 patient-months on drug between the abiraterone and enzalutamide cohorts adjusting for patient factors (e.g., age). We compared mental health encounters in the year before versus after starting therapy using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

We identified 2902 CRPC patients who received abiraterone (n = 1992) or enzalutamide (n = 910). We found no difference in outpatient mental health encounters between the two groups (adjusted incident rate ratio [aIRR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.15). However, men with preexisting mental health diagnoses received 81.3% of the outpatient mental health encounters and had higher rates of these encounters with enzalutamide (aIRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.09-1.34). Among patients with ≥1 year of enrollment before and after starting abiraterone (n = 1139) or enzalutamide (n = 446), there was no difference in mental health care utilization before versus after starting treatment (17.0% of patients vs. 17.6%, p = 0.60, abiraterone; 16.4% vs. 18.4%, p = 0.26, enzalutamide).

CONCLUSION

We found no overall differences in mental health care utilization between CRPC patients who received first-line abiraterone versus enzalutamide. However, men with preexisting mental health diagnoses received the majority of mental health care and had more mental health visits with enzalutamide.

In-office dispensing of oral targeted agents by urology practices in men with advanced prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Management of men with advanced prostate cancer has evolved to include urologists, made possible by oral targeted agents (eg, abiraterone or enzalutamide) that can be dispensed directly to patients in the office. We sought to investigate whether this increasingly common model improves access to these agents, especially for Black men who are historically undertreated.

METHODS

We used 20% national Medicare data to perform a retrospective cohort study of men with advanced prostate cancer from 2011 through 2019, managed by urology practices with and without in-office dispensing. Using a difference-in-difference framework, generalized estimating equations were used to measure the effect of in-office dispensing on prescriptions for abiraterone and/or enzalutamide, adjusting for differences between patients, including race.

RESULTS

New prescription fills for oral targeted agents increased after the adoption of in-office dispensing (+4.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.4% to 5.4%) relative to that for men managed by practices without dispensing (+2.4%, 95% CI = 1.4% to 3.4%). The increase in the postintervention period (difference-in-difference estimate) was 2% higher (95% CI = 0.6% to 3.4%) for men managed by practices adopting dispensing relative to men managed by practices without dispensing. The effect was strongest for practices adopting dispensing in 2015 (difference-in-difference estimate: +4.2%, 95% CI = 2.3% to 6.2%). The effect of dispensing adoption did not differ by race.

CONCLUSION

Adoption of in-office dispensing by urology practices increased prescription fills for oral targeted agents in men with advanced prostate cancer. This model of delivery may improve access to this important class of medications.

Differential adoption of castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment across facilities in a national healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, abiraterone and enzalutamide have largely replaced ketoconazole as oral treatments for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We investigated the differential adoption of abiraterone and enzalutamide across facilities in a national healthcare system to understand the impact a facility has on the receipt of these novel therapies.

METHODS

Using data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse, we identified a cohort of men with CRPC who received the most common first-line therapies: abiraterone, enzalutamide, docetaxel, or ketoconazole between 2010 and 2017. We described variability in the adoption of abiraterone and enzalutamide across facilities by time period (2010-2013 or 2014-2017). We categorized facilities depending on the timing of adoption of abiraterone and enzalutamide relative to other facilities and described facility characteristics associated with early and late adoption.

RESULTS

We identified 4998 men treated with ketoconazole, docetaxel, abiraterone, or enzalutamide as first-line CRPC therapy between 2010 and 2017 at 125 national facilities. When limiting the cohort to oral therapies, most patients treated earlier in the study period (2010-2013) received ketoconazole. A dramatic shift was seen by the second half of the study period (2014-2017) with most men treated with first-line abiraterone (61%). Despite this shift and a new standard of care, some facilities persisted in the widespread use of ketoconazole in the later period, so-called late adopting facilities. After multivariable adjustment, patients who received treatment at a late adopting facility were more likely receiving care at a lower complexity, rural facility, with less urology and hematology/oncology workforce (all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Many facilities persisted in their use of ketoconazole as first-line CRPC therapy, even when other facilities had adopted the new standard of care abiraterone and enzalutamide. Further work is needed to identify the effect of this late adoption on outcomes important to patients.