Hamilton AS, Wu XC, Lipscomb J, Fleming ST, Lo M, Wang D, Goodman M, Ho A, Owen JB, Rao C, German RR. Regional, provider, and economic factors associated with the choice of active surveillance in the treatment of men with localized prostate cancer.
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2013;
2012:213-20. [PMID:
23271776 DOI:
10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs033]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Data on initial treatment of 8232 cases of localized prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004 were obtained by medical record abstraction (including hospital and outpatient locations) from seven state cancer registries participating in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Breast and Prostate Cancer Data Quality and Patterns of Care Study. Distinction was made between men receiving no therapy with no monitoring plan (no therapy/no plan [NT/NP]) and those receiving active surveillance (AS). Overall, 8.6% received NT/NP and 4.7% received AS. Older age at diagnosis, lower clinical risk group, and certain registry locations were significant predictors of use of both AS and NT/NP. AS was also related to having more severe comorbidities, whereas nonwhite race was predicted receiving NT/NP. Men receiving AS lived in areas with a higher number of urologists per 100 000 men than those receiving NT/NP. In summary, physician and clinical factors were stronger predictors of AS, whereas demographic and regional factors were related to receiving NT/NP. Physicians appear reluctant to recommend AS for younger patients with no comorbidities.
Collapse