Cargando…

Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?

As recommended by current NCCN guidelines, patients with very low‐risk prostate cancer may be treated with active surveillance (AS), but this may be underutilized. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified men (2010–2013) with biopsy‐proven, very low‐risk prostate cancer that met AS c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parikh, Rahul R., Kim, Sinae, Stein, Mark N., Haffty, Bruce G., Kim, Isaac Y., Goyal, Sharad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5633554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28925011
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1132
_version_ 1783269911467917312
author Parikh, Rahul R.
Kim, Sinae
Stein, Mark N.
Haffty, Bruce G.
Kim, Isaac Y.
Goyal, Sharad
author_facet Parikh, Rahul R.
Kim, Sinae
Stein, Mark N.
Haffty, Bruce G.
Kim, Isaac Y.
Goyal, Sharad
author_sort Parikh, Rahul R.
collection PubMed
description As recommended by current NCCN guidelines, patients with very low‐risk prostate cancer may be treated with active surveillance (AS), but this may be underutilized. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified men (2010–2013) with biopsy‐proven, very low‐risk prostate cancer that met AS criteria as suggested by Epstein (stage ≤ T1c; Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6; PSA < 10; and ≤2 [or <33%] positive biopsy cores) and aged ≤76, and low comorbidity index (Charlson‐Deyo score = 0). For those patients meeting this criteria, we performed generalized estimation equation (GEE) method with incorporation of correlation in patients clustered within facility to determine the likelihood of undergoing AS. Among the 448 773 patients in the NCDB with low‐risk prostate cancer, 40 839 patients met the inclusion criteria. AS was utilized in 5798 patients (14.2%), while within the very low‐risk patients receiving treatment, up to 52.2% received radical prostatectomy. In univariate analyses, AS utilization was associated with older age, uninsured status (compared to private insurance), farther distance from facility, academic/research institutions and particularly in the New England region (all P < 0.01). After adjustments of other predictors in multivariate analysis, patients preferentially received AS if they were older (all OR's > 1 compared to younger groups), uninsured (vs. any insurance type, OR's > 1); or treated at academic/research center (OR > 1). The overall use of AS increased from 11.6% (2010) to 27.3% (2013). We found a low, but rising rate of AS in a nationally representative group of very low‐risk prostate cancer patients. Disparities in the use of AS may be targeted to improve adherence to national guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5633554
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56335542017-10-17 Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice? Parikh, Rahul R. Kim, Sinae Stein, Mark N. Haffty, Bruce G. Kim, Isaac Y. Goyal, Sharad Cancer Med Cancer Prevention As recommended by current NCCN guidelines, patients with very low‐risk prostate cancer may be treated with active surveillance (AS), but this may be underutilized. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified men (2010–2013) with biopsy‐proven, very low‐risk prostate cancer that met AS criteria as suggested by Epstein (stage ≤ T1c; Gleason score (GS) ≤ 6; PSA < 10; and ≤2 [or <33%] positive biopsy cores) and aged ≤76, and low comorbidity index (Charlson‐Deyo score = 0). For those patients meeting this criteria, we performed generalized estimation equation (GEE) method with incorporation of correlation in patients clustered within facility to determine the likelihood of undergoing AS. Among the 448 773 patients in the NCDB with low‐risk prostate cancer, 40 839 patients met the inclusion criteria. AS was utilized in 5798 patients (14.2%), while within the very low‐risk patients receiving treatment, up to 52.2% received radical prostatectomy. In univariate analyses, AS utilization was associated with older age, uninsured status (compared to private insurance), farther distance from facility, academic/research institutions and particularly in the New England region (all P < 0.01). After adjustments of other predictors in multivariate analysis, patients preferentially received AS if they were older (all OR's > 1 compared to younger groups), uninsured (vs. any insurance type, OR's > 1); or treated at academic/research center (OR > 1). The overall use of AS increased from 11.6% (2010) to 27.3% (2013). We found a low, but rising rate of AS in a nationally representative group of very low‐risk prostate cancer patients. Disparities in the use of AS may be targeted to improve adherence to national guidelines. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5633554/ /pubmed/28925011 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1132 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Cancer Prevention
Parikh, Rahul R.
Kim, Sinae
Stein, Mark N.
Haffty, Bruce G.
Kim, Isaac Y.
Goyal, Sharad
Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title_full Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title_fullStr Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title_full_unstemmed Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title_short Trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
title_sort trends in active surveillance for very low‐risk prostate cancer: do guidelines influence modern practice?
topic Cancer Prevention
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5633554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28925011
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1132
work_keys_str_mv AT parikhrahulr trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice
AT kimsinae trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice
AT steinmarkn trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice
AT hafftybruceg trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice
AT kimisaacy trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice
AT goyalsharad trendsinactivesurveillanceforverylowriskprostatecancerdoguidelinesinfluencemodernpractice