Deferred treatment of localized prostate cancer in the elderly: the impact of the age and stage at the time of diagnosis on the treatment decision

Immunotherapy Utilization Among Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: Impact of Comorbidities

In patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), the extent to which immunotherapy utilization rate varies by comorbidities is unclear. Using the National Cancer Database from 2015 to 2016, we assessed the association between levels of comorbidity and immunotherapy utilization among mNSCLC patients. Burden of comorbidities was ascertained based on the modified Charlson-Deyo score and categorized as an ordinal variable (0, 1, and ≥2). Immunotherapy utilization was determined based on registry data. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the comorbidity score while adjusting for sociodemographic factors, histopathologic subtype, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, insurance, facility type, and other cancer history. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age and race/ethnicity. Overall, of the 89,030 patients with mNSCLC, 38.6% (N=34,382) had the comorbidity score of ≥1. Most patients were non-Hispanic white (82.3%, N=73,309) and aged 65 years and above (63.2%, N=56,300), with the mean age of 68.4 years (SD=10.6). Only 7.0% (N=6220) of patients received immunotherapy during 2015-2106. Patients with a comorbidity score of ≥2 had a significantly lower rate of immunotherapy utilization versus those without comorbidities (aOR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93; P-trend<0.01). In subgroup analysis by age, association patterns were similar among patients younger than 65 and those aged 65-74 years. There were no significant differences in subgroup analysis by race/ethnicity, although statistical significance was only observed for white patients (comorbidity score ≥2 vs. 0: aOR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93; P-trend<0.01). In conclusion, mNSCLC patients with a high burden of comorbidities are less likely to receive immunotherapy.

Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment

BACKGROUND

With the advent of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and the increase in the number of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy cores, there has been a dramatic rise in the incidence of low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC). Because > 97% of men with LRPC are likely to die of something other than prostate cancer, it is critical that patients give thought to whether early curative treatment is the only option at diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify a group of men with LRPC who may not require initial treatment and monitor them on our active surveillance (AS) protocol, to determine the percentage treated and the outcome and to analyze the quality-of-life data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We defined patients eligible for AS as Gleason ≤ 6, PSA ≤ 10, and two or fewer biopsy cores with ≤ 20% tumor in each core.

MEASUREMENTS

Kaplan Meier analysis was used to predict the 5-year treatment free survival. Logistic regression determined the predictors of treatment. Data on sexual function, continence, and outcome were obtained and analyzed.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The AS cohort consisted of 230 patients with a mean age of 63.4 yr; 86% remained on AS for a mean follow-up of 44 mo. Thirty-two of the 230 patients (14%) were treated for a mean follow-up of 33 mo. Twelve had a total prostatectomy (TP). The pathologic stage of these patients was similar to initially treated TP patients with LRPC. Fourteen underwent radiation therapy, and six underwent androgen-deprivation therapy. Fifty percent of patients had no tumor on the first rebiopsy, and only 5% of these patients were subsequently treated. PSA doubling time and clinical stage were not predictors of treatment. No patient progressed after treatment. Among the AS patients, 30% had incontinence, yet < 15% were bothered by it. As measured by the Sexual Health Inventory for Men, 49% of patients had, at a minimum, moderate (≤ 16) erectile dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

If guidelines for AS are narrowly defined to include only patients with Gleason 6, tumor volume ≤ 20% in one or two biopsy cores, and PSA levels ≤ 10, few patients are likely to require treatment. Progression-free survival of those treated is likely to be equivalent to patients with similar clinical findings treated at diagnosis.

Continuing controversy over monitoring men with localized prostate cancer: a systematic review of programs in the prostate specific antigen era

PURPOSE

There is continuing controversy over the most appropriate treatment for screen detected and clinically localized prostate cancer, and increasing interest in monitoring such men initially with radical treatment targeted at cancers showing signs of progressive potential but while they are still curable. Current evidence on monitoring protocols and biomarkers used to predict disease progression was systematically reviewed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica (EMBASE) bibliographic databases were searched from 1988 to October 2004, supplemented by manual searches of reference lists, focusing on studies reporting monitoring of men with localized prostate cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 48 potentially eligible articles were found but only 5 studies, in which there was a total of 451 participants, restricted entry criteria to men with clinically localized (T1-T2) prostate cancer. Monitoring protocols varied with little consensus, although the majority used prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination, while some added re-biopsy to assess progression. Actuarial probabilities of freedom from disease progression at 4 to 5 years of followup were 67% to 72%. However, up to 50% of men abandoned monitoring within 2 years, largely because of anxiety related to increasing prostate specific antigen rather than objective evidence of disease progression. There was no robust evidence to support prostate specific antigen doubling times or velocity to identify men in whom disease may progress. Studies were characterized by small sample size, short-term followup, observer bias and uncertain validity around variable definitions of progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that some form of monitoring would be a suitable treatment option in men with localized prostate cancer but there is little consensus over what markers should be used in such a program or how progression should be properly defined. The search for a method that safely identifies men with prostate cancer who could avoid radical intervention must continue.

Radiation therapy in the elderly

The purpose of this review is to highlight aspects of radiation oncology specifically related to aging and caring for the older patient with cancer. Particular emphasis is placed on the preclinical and clinical studies focusing on the efficacy and toxicity of RT in this population. Special techniques are also reviewed that have particular relevance to the treatment of the elderly.

Social disparities and prostate cancer: mapping the gaps in our knowledge

To evaluate the current state of our knowledge regarding social disparities and prostate cancer and to map the domains where substantial knowledge has been acquired as well as those where little is known, with the purpose of identifying important areas for future research. A Medline research was conducted to identify published papers regarding social disparities in prostate cancer since 1990. The results of this review are presented in a social disparities and prostate cancer grid designed to highlight which domains of social disparities have been researched and which neglected. The major social disparity in prostate cancer concerns the extremely high prostate cancer incidence and mortality seen among black Americans. This is also the area where the most research has been performed. Low socioeconomic position is associated with poorer prostate cancer outcomes but not with higher prostate cancer incidence. It remains poorly defined to what extent racial/ethnic differences in prostate cancer result from differences in socioeconomic position (SEP). Understanding the causes of the high prostate cancer mortality seen among black men remains the major challenge in the area of social disparities and prostate cancer.

Race/ethnicity and the intensity of medical monitoring under 'watchful waiting' for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have found that racial/ethnic minority patients with prostate cancer are more frequently managed with "watchful waiting." Little, however, is known about the medical care received among men managed with watchful waiting. We examine the type and intensity of medical monitoring received by African American, Hispanic, and white patients with prostate cancer managed with "watchful waiting" in fee-for-service systems.

METHODS

Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data for men diagnosed with prostate cancer 1994-1996 were used in this study. Men were determined to have initially received watchful waiting if they did not receive surgery, radiation, or hormone treatment within the first 7 months of diagnosis. Crosstabulations, multivariate logistic, and Cox regressions were used to examine the association between clinical and sociodemographic variables and the receipt of a primary care, urology visit, prostate-specific antigen test, or bone scan.

RESULTS

In general, Hispanic and African American men received less medical monitoring and had longer median times from diagnosis to receipt of a medical monitoring visit or procedure than white men. Furthermore, nearly 6% of African American, 5% of Hispanic, and 1% of white men did not have any medical monitoring visits or procedures during the 60-month follow-up period (P<0.001). Differences in observed clinical or sociodemographic characteristics did not explain variations in medical monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Regular medical monitoring is considered by most medical authorities to be a necessary component of management with watchful waiting. The disproportionately low receipt of medical monitoring visits and procedures observed for African American and Hispanic men managed with watchful waiting in this study suggest that there are racial/ethnic disparities in the receipt of appropriate prostate cancer management.

External beam radiotherapy in elderly patients with clinically localized prostate adenocarcinoma: age is not a problem

The files of 183 elderly patients aged >70 years, with localized prostate cancer (T1-3, N0-X, M0), treated with radical external radiation therapy (ERT) from January 1992 to December 2001 at the Radiotherapy Department of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan, were reviewed. Median age was 75 years. ERT represented the sole treatment for 73 patients (39.9%); in 110 cases (60.1%) hormonal therapy (HT) was associated with neoadjuvant intent. Five-year overall, disease-specific and biochemical NED (bNED) survival rates were 90.2, 93.7 and 63.2%, respectively. A subset of 23 patients aged 80 years and over were analyzed and compared to 160 men aged 70-79 years. Acute toxicity and late complications were analyzed in the two groups of patients according to the RTOG scoring system. Only 10 patients (5.4%) showed grades 2-3 (G2-3) late sequelae. The results obtained in this single-institute series highlight the pivotal role of ERT in the management of clinically localized prostate cancer in the elderly.

Does age influence the behaviour of localized prostate cancer?

OBJECTIVE

To assess, in a meta-analysis of published studies, whether age influences the behaviour of localized prostate cancer.

METHODS

The Medline database was searched from 1966 to 2000 to identify studies analysing the outcome of localized prostate cancer by age, using disease-specific outcome measures, and having controlled for the established prognostic factors of grade, T stage and, where available, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level.

RESULTS

In all, 34 studies were identified, which included a total of 27 551 patients. The incomplete and heterogeneous nature of the reports precluded any quantitative overview. The findings of these reports are described and methodological shortcomings discussed.

CONCLUSION

The evidence suggests that young age was an adverse prognostic factor in some series of radiation therapy before the advent of PSA assays, when men typically presented clinically with locally advanced disease, but that age has no significant prognostic effect in contemporary series of localized prostate cancer. Possible explanations for this difference are discussed, together with implications for further studies.