Contemporary nationwide patterns of self-reported prostate-specific antigen screening in US veterans

PSA screening, prostate biopsy, and treatment of prostate cancer in the years surrounding the USPSTF recommendation against prostate cancer screening

BACKGROUND

The 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against screening for prostate cancer has impacted rates of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and appears to be associated with declining prostate cancer incidence. Our objective was to characterize health care utilization that may explain these observed trends.

METHODS

MarketScan claims, which capture >30 million privately insured patients in the United States, were queried for all men aged 40-64 years for the years 2008-2014. PSA testing, prostate biopsy, prostate cancer diagnosis, and definitive local treatment were determined using associated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Current Procedural Terminology, Fourth Edition codes.

RESULTS

There were approximately 6 million qualifying men with a full year of data. PSA testing, prostate biopsy, and prostate cancer detection declined significantly between 2009 and 2014, most notably after 2011. The prostate biopsy rate per 100 patients with a PSA test decreased over the study period from 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.92-1.97) to 1.52 (95% CI, 1.50-1.54). Prostate cancer incidence per prostate biopsy increased over the study period from 0.36 (95% CI, 0.35-0.36) to 0.39 (95% CI, 0.39-0.40). Of new prostate cancer diagnoses, the proportion managed with definitive local treatment decreased from 69% (95% CI, 69%-70%) to 54% (95% CI, 53%-55%). Both PSA testing and prostate cancer incidence decreased significantly after 2011 (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In a large cohort of privately insured men, PSA testing, prostate biopsy, prostate cancer incidence, and local definitive treatment for prostate cancer decreased between 2008 and 2014, most notably after 2011. This decrease may be driven by differential referral patterns from primary care providers to urologists. Cancer 2018;124:2733-2739. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Effects of a randomized trial comparing standard and enhanced counseling for men at high risk of prostate cancer as a function of race and monitoring style

Despite conflicting guidelines, a significant subset of high-risk men decide to undergo routine prostate cancer screening. Yet, there is a scarcity of available programs, and no studies evaluating interventions to support men in dealing with the psychosocial impact of screening. In this study, one of the first to explore the responses of high-risk men enrolling in a Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment Program ( N = 128), patients underwent a prostate cancer risk counseling visit immediately followed by either a cognitive-affective preparation session designed to help them process the information they received or a general health education session. All men in this self-selected sample chose to participate in prostate cancer screening. Men were assessed 3 weeks and 6 months post-counseling. The impact of the enhanced counseling condition on knowledge, perceived risk, expectancies, and intrusive ideation was a function of racial and coping style group. Implications for tailored interventions to maximize preparedness for risk and screening counseling are discussed.

Properties of the 4-Kallikrein Panel Outside the Diagnostic Gray Zone: Meta-Analysis of Patients with Positive Digital Rectal Examination or Prostate Specific Antigen 10 ng/ml and Above

PURPOSE

The 4-kallikrein panel, commercially available as the 4Kscore™, is a reflex test for prostate cancer early detection that has been extensively validated in multiple international cohorts. It has been suggested that use of such reflex tests be limited to those with prostate specific antigen less than 10 ng/ml and negative digital rectal examination. We aimed to determine the value of the panel in men outside this "diagnostic gray zone."

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis using data from prior studies on the 4-kallikrein panel. We calculated the properties of the panel for predicting high grade (Gleason 7+) cancer in a subgroup of men with either positive digital rectal examination or prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml.

RESULTS

A total 2,891 men from 8 cohorts were included. An important proportion of patients, including 32% in the United States validation study, had prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml or a positive digital rectal examination. For men with prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml the fixed-effects estimate for the discrimination of the kallikrein model was 0.84 vs 0.69 for the base model (difference 0.128, 95% CI 0.098-0.159). In the positive digital rectal examination group discrimination was 0.82 vs 0.72 (difference 0.092, 95% CI 0.069-0.115). Decision analysis showed a clinical net benefit for use of the panel in this subgroup with a reduction in biopsy rates of about 20% and only a small number of high grade cancers missed, or fewer than 3% of those not biopsied.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the kallikrein panel in men with a positive digital rectal examination or prostate specific antigen 10 to 25 ng/ml is justified.

Determinants of Prostate Specific Antigen Screening among Black Men in the United States in the Contemporary Era

PURPOSE

Although black men represent a high risk population for prostate specific antigen screening for prostate cancer, recommendations in black men are unclear. To our knowledge the resultant effect of conflicting recommendations and disparities in access to care on prostate specific antigen screening in black men is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared the rate of self-reported prostate specific antigen screening in black men relative to that in nonHispanic white men. The BRFSS (Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System) 2012 data set was used to identify asymptomatic men 40 to 99 years old who reported undergoing prostate specific antigen screening in the last 12 months. Age, education, income, residence location, marital status, health insurance, regular access to a health care provider and a health care provider recommendation to undergo screening were extracted. Subgroup analyses by race and age were performed using complex samples logistic regression models to assess the odds of undergoing prostate specific antigen screening.

RESULTS

In 2012 there were 122,309 survey respondents (weighted estimate 54.5 million) in the study population, of whom 29% of black and 32% of nonHispanic white men reported undergoing prostate specific antigen screening. Younger black males had higher rates and odds of screening than nonHispanic white men of a similar age (ages 45 to 49, 50 to 54 and 55 to 59 years OR 1.66, 1.58 and 1.36, respectively). Among black men only a higher education level (graduates vs nongraduates OR 2.12), regular access to a health care provider (OR 2.05) and a health care provider recommendation for screening (OR 8.43) were independently associated with prostate specific antigen screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite long-standing disparities in health care access black males 45 to 60 years old have a higher rate and probability of prostate specific antigen screening than nonHispanic white men. Among black men educational attainment had a more pronounced association. In contrast the association with health care provider recommendations was less pronounced relative to that in nonHispanic white men. Future research may shed more light on the gamut of factors that influence the decision making process for prostate specific antigen testing.