Literature DB >> 21492911

Bone scan overuse in staging of prostate cancer: an analysis of a Veterans Affairs cohort.

Roland Palvolgyi1, Timothy J Daskivich, Karim Chamie, Lorna Kwan, Mark S Litwin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the use and subsequent yield of bone scan imaging in a contemporary Veterans Affairs (VA) cohort of men with prostate cancer. With contemporary widespread prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, more patients are being diagnosed with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, reducing the need and yield of bone scan imaging.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 1598 men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1998 to 2004 at the Greater Los Angeles and Long Beach VA Medical Centers. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to measure the association between patient (age, race, and comorbidities) and tumor (PSA, clinical stage, Gleason grade) characteristics with bone scan use and subsequent positivity. We conducted the analysis for scans for the entire cohort and those with low and high risk of metastatic disease.
RESULTS: Of 519 men with low-risk disease, 132 (25%) underwent bone scan imaging, none with positive findings. On multivariate analysis for the entire cohort, younger age, Long Beach VA site, increasing PSA level (≥10 ng/mL), clinical stage (cT2 or greater), and Gleason score (≥7) were all positively associated with bone scan use; however, only PSA level ≥20 ng/mL, clinical stage cT3 or greater, and Gleason score ≥4 + 3 corresponded with positivity. A bone scan positivity rate of ≥10% was limited to men with clinical stage cT3 or greater, Gleason score of ≥8, or PSA level of ≥20 ng/mL.
CONCLUSIONS: Although decreasing in incidence with time, our results demonstrate extensive overuse of bone scan imaging among VA patients with low-risk prostate cancer. These patterns of overuse for men with low-risk cancer, yielding no positive findings, result in unnecessary patient anxiety and significant economic waste for the VA Healthcare System.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21492911     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.083

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  13 in total

Review 1.  Race/Ethnicity and overuse of care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Nancy R Kressin; Peter W Groeneveld
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.911

Review 2.  Overuse of Health Care Services in the Management of Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Shrujal S Baxi; Minal Kale; Salomeh Keyhani; Benjamin R Roman; Annie Yang; Antonio P Derosa; Deborah Korenstein
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Predicting bone scan positivity after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy in both hormone-naive men and patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy: results from the SEARCH database.

Authors:  D M Moreira; M R Cooperberg; L E Howard; W J Aronson; C J Kane; M K Terris; C L Amling; M Kuchibhatla; S J Freedland
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 4.  Determinants of the overuse of imaging in low-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Allison H Oakes; Ritu Sharma; Madeline Jackson; Jodi B Segal
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 5.  Systematic review of interventions that improve provider compliance to imaging guidelines for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Samuel M Pettit; David Mikhail; Michael Feuerstein
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-09       Impact factor: 2.052

Review 6.  Updated trends in imaging use in men diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Authors:  S P Porten; A Smith; A Y Odisho; M S Litwin; C S Saigal; P R Carroll; M R Cooperberg
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 5.554

7.  Characterising potential bone scan overuse amongst men treated with radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Peter S Kirk; Tudor Borza; Megan E V Caram; Dean A Shumway; Danil V Makarov; Jennifer A Burns; Jeremy B Shelton; John T Leppert; Christina Chapman; Michael Chang; Brent K Hollenbeck; Ted A Skolarus
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Predictors of Time to Metastasis in Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Daniel M Moreira; Lauren E Howard; Katharine N Sourbeer; Hiruni S Amarasekara; Lydia C Chow; Dillon C Cockrell; Brian T Hanyok; William J Aronson; Christopher J Kane; Martha K Terris; Christopher L Amling; Matthew R Cooperberg; Alex Liede; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Adherence to Guidelines among Italian Urologists on Imaging Preoperative Staging of Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results from the MIRROR (Multicenter Italian Report on Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes and Research) Study.

Authors:  Alchiede Simonato; Virginia Varca; Mauro Gacci; Paolo Gontero; Ottavio De Cobelli; Massimo Maffezzini; Roberto Salvioni; Marco Carini; Andrea Decensi; Vincenzo Mirone; Giorgio Carmignani
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2012-05-15

10.  A qualitative study to understand guideline-discordant use of imaging to stage incident prostate cancer.

Authors:  Danil V Makarov; Erica Sedlander; R Scott Braithwaite; Scott E Sherman; Steven Zeliadt; Cary P Gross; Caitlin Curnyn; Michele Shedlin
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.