Interrelationship Between Health Insurance Status and Prostate Cancer Grade Can Have Critical Impact on Prostate Cancer Disease Control: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Effect of Radiation Treatment at a High-Volume Center on Outcomes in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of radiation treatment at a high-volume center on overall survival in men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

From 2004-2015, 430,347 patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were identified in the NCDB. Radiation case volume (RCV) of each hospital was calculated based on number of patients treated. After excluding certain patients including those with metastatic disease, our final analysis population included 116,091 intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) or radiation with androgen deprivation therapy (RT+ADT). Characteristics analyzed include age, race, distance to treatment facility, Charlson-Deyo Score (CDS), and socioeconomic factors. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). 5-year survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using multivariate analysis (MVA). Cox regression and propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Median follow up was 63.5 months and estimated 5-year OS was 90.1% at high RCV centers and 88.2% at low RCV centers (p<0.0001). Treatment at high RCV facility was associated with significantly lower mortality compared to treatment at a low RCV facility on MVA and PSM analysis. The survival benefit of treatment at a high RCV facility remained when high RCV facilities were defined as those above the 80^th, 90^th, and 95^th percentile in patient volume (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment at a high radiation case volume facility is associated with improved OS in patients with radiation-treated intermediate-risk prostate cancer. This survival benefit is important to consider when choosing a treatment center for radiation therapy.

Enhanced antibiotic prophylaxis and infection-related complications following prostate biopsy

PURPOSE

Sepsis after prostate biopsy is a costly and potentially lethal complication. We sought to assess whether enhanced antibiotic prophylaxis regimens combining oral and parenteral antibiotics may decrease the risk of post-biopsy urinary tract infection and sepsis compared to regimens with only oral antibiotics.

METHODS

We identified men with commercial insurance who underwent prostate biopsy (2009-2015) with prophylactic antibiotic coverage. Our primary exposure of interest was antibiotic regimen: enhanced, oral-only, and parenteral-only. Post-biopsy outcomes of interest included urinary tract infections and sepsis/bacteremia after prostate biopsy. We used bivariate testing to assess associations between outcomes, exposures, and other covariates of interest. Multivariable regression was used to estimate adjusted odds of infectious outcomes based on antibiotic regimen.

RESULTS

We identified 163,831 men who underwent prostate biopsy. The proportion of men with infectious complications (5.5% in 2009 to 6.9% in 2015, p < 0.001) and sepsis (0.24% in 2009 to 0.30% in 2015, p = 0.327) increased over the timeframe of our analysis. Use of fluoroquinolones was associated with a decreased risk of infectious outcomes (5.8 vs 7.3% without, OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.88). Use of enhanced antibiotic regimens was associated with an increased risk of infectious outcomes (6.8 vs 5.7% oral, OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.16-1.31) and sepsis (0.34 vs 0.24% oral, OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.08-1.82) among our cohort.

CONCLUSION

We did not observe a significant reduction in infectious complications among men who received enhanced antibiotics regimens before prostate biopsy. This may be due to increased antibiotic resistance or unmeasured risk factors among those receiving enhanced regimens.

Associations of Medicaid Expansion With Insurance Coverage, Stage at Diagnosis, and Treatment Among Patients With Genitourinary Malignant Neoplasms

IMPORTANCE

Health insurance coverage is associated with improved outcomes in patients with cancer. However, it is unknown whether Medicaid expansion through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was associated with improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with genitourinary cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of Medicaid expansion with health insurance status, stage at diagnosis, and receipt of treatment among nonelderly patients with newly diagnosed kidney, bladder, or prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This case-control study included adults aged 18 to 64 years with a new primary diagnosis of kidney, bladder, or prostate cancer, selected from the National Cancer Database from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016. Patients in states that expanded Medicaid were the case group, and patients in nonexpansion states were the control group. Data were analyzed from January 2020 to March 2021.

EXPOSURES

State Medicaid expansion status.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Insurance status, stage at diagnosis, and receipt of cancer and stage-specific treatments. Cases and controls were compared with difference-in-difference analyses.

RESULTS

Among a total of 340 552 patients with newly diagnosed genitourinary cancers, 94 033 (27.6%) had kidney cancer, 25 770 (7.6%) had bladder cancer, and 220 749 (64.8%) had prostate cancer. Medicaid expansion was associated with a net decrease in uninsured rate of 1.1 (95% CI, -1.4 to -0.8) percentage points across all incomes and a net decrease in the low-income population of 4.4 (95% CI, -5.7 to -3.0) percentage points compared with nonexpansion states. Expansion was also associated with a significant shift toward early-stage diagnosis in kidney cancer across all income levels (difference-in-difference, 1.4 [95% CI, 0.1 to 2.6] percentage points) and among individuals with low income (difference-in-difference, 4.6 [95% CI, 0.3 to 9.0] percentage points) and in prostate cancer among individuals with low income (difference-in-difference, 3.0 [95% CI, 0.3 to 5.7] percentage points). Additionally, there was a net increase associated with expansion compared with nonexpansion in receipt of active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer of 4.1 (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.3) percentage points across incomes and 4.5 (95% CI, 0 to 9.0) percentage points among patients in low-income areas.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that Medicaid expansion was associated with decreases in uninsured status, increases in the proportion of kidney and prostate cancer diagnosed in an early stage, and higher rates of active surveillance in the appropriate, low-risk prostate cancer population. Associations were concentrated in population residing in low-income areas and reinforce the importance of improving access to care to all patients with cancer.