INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer. Survival rates are high, making preventive care maintenance important. Factors associated with prostate-cancer cases' preventive care in the short-term (Year 1) and long-term (Year 5), and how survivors' care compares to non-cancer controls, require study. METHODS: This retrospective, controlled SEER-Medicare study included loco-regional prostate cancer cases age ≥ 66 in fee-for-service Medicare diagnosed in 2000 and surviving ≥ 12 months, and non-cancer controls matched to cases on socio-demographics and survival. Outcomes included influenza vaccination, cholesterol screening, and colorectal cancer screening. Independent variables were number of physician visits, physician specialties visited, initial prostate cancer treatment, socio-demographic characteristics, and case-control status. RESULTS: There were 13,507 cases and 13,507 controls in Year 1, and 10,482 cases and 10,482 controls in Year 5. In Years 1 and 5, total number of visits (6/6 outcomes) and primary care provider (PCP) visits (5/6 outcomes) were most consistently associated with preventive care receipt. In Year 1, prostate cancer cases were more likely than controls to receive influenza vaccination (48% vs. 45%) but less likely to receive colorectal cancer screening (29% vs. 31%) (both p < 0.0001). In Year 5, prostate cancer cases remained more likely than controls to receive influenza vaccination (46% vs. 44%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in survivors' short-term preventive care did not lead to worse long-term preventive care. The number of physician visits, particularly PCP visits, are important factors associated with appropriate care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: PCP involvement in prostate cancer patients' care is critical both during treatment and for long-term survivors.
INTRODUCTION:Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer. Survival rates are high, making preventive care maintenance important. Factors associated with prostate-cancer cases' preventive care in the short-term (Year 1) and long-term (Year 5), and how survivors' care compares to non-cancer controls, require study. METHODS: This retrospective, controlled SEER-Medicare study included loco-regional prostate cancer cases age ≥ 66 in fee-for-service Medicare diagnosed in 2000 and surviving ≥ 12 months, and non-cancer controls matched to cases on socio-demographics and survival. Outcomes included influenza vaccination, cholesterol screening, and colorectal cancer screening. Independent variables were number of physician visits, physician specialties visited, initial prostate cancer treatment, socio-demographic characteristics, and case-control status. RESULTS: There were 13,507 cases and 13,507 controls in Year 1, and 10,482 cases and 10,482 controls in Year 5. In Years 1 and 5, total number of visits (6/6 outcomes) and primary care provider (PCP) visits (5/6 outcomes) were most consistently associated with preventive care receipt. In Year 1, prostate cancer cases were more likely than controls to receive influenza vaccination (48% vs. 45%) but less likely to receive colorectal cancer screening (29% vs. 31%) (both p < 0.0001). In Year 5, prostate cancer cases remained more likely than controls to receive influenza vaccination (46% vs. 44%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in survivors' short-term preventive care did not lead to worse long-term preventive care. The number of physician visits, particularly PCP visits, are important factors associated with appropriate care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: PCP involvement in prostate cancerpatients' care is critical both during treatment and for long-term survivors.
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Craig C Earle; Robert J Herbert; Bridget A Neville; Amanda L Blackford; Kevin D Frick Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-01-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Kevin D Frick; Melinda E Kantsiper; Kimberly S Peairs; Robert J Herbert; Amanda L Blackford; Antonio C Wolff; Craig C Earle Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Kevin D Frick; Amanda L Blackford; Robert J Herbert; Bridget A Neville; Michael A Carducci; Craig C Earle Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-08-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Craig C Earle; Robert J Herbert; Bridget A Neville; Amanda L Blackford; Kevin D Frick Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Kevin D Frick; Kimberly S Peairs; Melinda E Kantsiper; Robert J Herbert; Amanda L Blackford; Antonio C Wolff; Craig C Earle Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lacey Loomer; Kevin C Ward; Evelyn A Reynolds; Silke A von Esenwein; Joseph Lipscomb Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Mary S McCabe; Smita Bhatia; Kevin C Oeffinger; Gregory H Reaman; Courtney Tyne; Dana S Wollins; Melissa M Hudson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Laura P Forsythe; Neeraj K Arora; Catherine M Alfano; Kathryn E Weaver; Ann S Hamilton; Noreen Aziz; Julia H Rowland Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-01-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Danielle Blanch-Hartigan; Laura P Forsythe; Catherine M Alfano; Tenbroeck Smith; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Patricia A Ganz; Julia H Rowland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-04-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lauren P Wallner; Jeff M Slezak; Virginia P Quinn; Ronald K Loo; Joanne E Schottinger; Roshan Bastani; Steven J Jacobsen Journal: J Mens Health Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 0.537
Authors: Nynikka R A Palmer; Ann M Geiger; Tisha M Felder; Lingyi Lu; L Douglas Case; Kathryn E Weaver Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Shawna V Hudson; Suzanne M Miller; Jennifer Hemler; Jeanne M Ferrante; Jennifer Lyle; Kevin C Oeffinger; Robert S Dipaola Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2012 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166