Screening and Treating Prostate Cancer in the Older Patient: Decision Making Across the Clinical Spectrum

Disparities in the Inclusion of Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups and Older Adults in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials: A Meta-analysis

Importance

Prostate cancer (PCa) is marked by disparities in clinical outcomes by race, ethnicity, and age. Equitable enrollment in clinical trials is fundamental to promoting health equity.

Objective

To evaluate disparities in the inclusion of racial and ethnic minority groups and older adults across PCa clinical trials.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify primary trial reports from each database's inception through February 2021. Global incidence in age subgroups and US population-based incidence in racial and ethnic subgroups were acquired from the Global Burden of Disease and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 21 incidence databases respectively.

Study Selection

All phase 2/3 randomized PCa clinical trials were eligible for age disparity analyses. Trials recruiting exclusively from the US were eligible for primary racial and ethnic disparity analyses.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

This study was reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Enrollment incidence ratios (EIRs), trial proportions (TPs) of participants 65 years or older or members of a racial and ethnic subgroup divided by global incidence in the corresponding age group, or US population-based incidence in the corresponding racial and ethnic subgroup, were calculated. Meta-regression was used to explore associations between trial characteristics and EIRs and trends in EIRs during the past 3 decades.

Results

Of 9552 participants among trials reporting race, 954 (10.8%) were African American/Black, 80 (1.5%) were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 8518 (78.5) were White. Of 65 US trials, 45 (69.2%) reported race and only 9 (13.8%) reported data on all 5 US racial categories. Of 286 global trials, 75 (26.2%) reported the enrollment proportion of older adults. Outcomes by race and age were reported in 2 (3.1%) and 41 (15.0%) trials, respectively. Black (EIR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) and Hispanic (EIR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) patients were significantly underrepresented in US trials. There was no disparity in older adult representation (TP, 21 143 [71.1%]; EIR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.95-1.05). The representation of Black patients was lower in larger trials (meta-regression coefficient, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02; P = .002).

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that Black and Hispanic men are underrepresented in trials compared with their share of PCa incidence. The representation of Black patients has consistently remained low during the past 2 decades.

Navigating the Cancer Screening Decision for Patients with Dementia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The risks of developing cancer and dementia both increase with age, giving rise to the complex question of whether continued cancer screening for older dementia patients is appropriate. This paper offers a practice-based clinical approach to determine an answer to this challenging question.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is no consensus on the prevalence of cancer and dementia as co-diagnoses. Persons with dementia are screened less often compared to those without dementia. There is significant literature focusing on screening in the geriatric population, but there is little evidence to support decision-making for screening for older patients with dementia. Given this lack of evidence, individualized decisions should be made in collaboration with patients and family caregivers. Four considerations to help guide this process include prognosis, behavioral constraints, cognitive capacity, and goals for care. Future research will be challenging due to variability of factors that inform screening decisions and the vulnerable nature of this patient population.

Management of Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Ensuring the Right Treatment of the Right Patient at the Right Time

Biochemically recurrent prostate cancer is an increasingly common disease state, with more than 25,000 cases occurring annually in the United States. Fortunately, progress continues to be made to more effectively identify metastatic disease, optimize existing therapies, and develop new technologies and therapeutic strategies for the timing and delivery of systemic treatments to improve outcomes. This review covers three topics related to the diagnosis and treatment of men with biochemical recurrence (BCR). First, we provide an update on the state of the rapidly evolving field of molecular imaging and its place in practice. Second, we describe validated clinicopathologic methods to risk stratify patients with biochemically recurrent disease, including new gene expression classifiers, to personalize postoperative radiotherapy (RT) timing. Last, we define our approach to optimal management with systemic therapy, including identifying the patients who may benefit most and balancing the duration and timing of treatment with consideration of the effect of therapy on quality of life (QOL) and medical complications associated with treatment.