OBJECTIVE: Previous studies addressing racial disparities in treatment for early-stage prostate cancer have focused on the etiology of undertreatment of black men. Our objective was to determine whether racial disparities are attributable to undertreatment, overtreatment, or both. METHODS: Using the SEER-Medicare dataset, we identified men 67–84 years-old diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 1998 to 2007. We stratified men into clinical benefit groups using tumor aggressiveness and life expectancy. Low-benefit was defined as low-risk tumors and life expectancy <10 years; high-benefit as moderate-risk tumors and life expectancy ≥10 years; all others were intermediate-benefit. Logistic regression modeled the association between race and treatment (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy) across benefit groups. RESULTS: Of 68,817 men (9.8% black and 90.2% white), 56.2% of black and 66.3% of white men received treatment (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=0.65; 95% CI, 0.62–0.69). The percent of low-, intermediate-, and high-benefit men who received treatment was 56.7%, 68.4%, and 79.6%, respectively (P=<0.001). In the low-benefit group, 51.9% of black vs. 57.2% of white patients received treatment (OR=0.74; 95% CI, 0.67–0.81) compared to 57.2% vs. 69.6% in the intermediate-benefit group (OR=0.64; 95% CI, 0.59–0.70). Racial disparity was largest in the high-benefit group (64.2% of black vs. 81.4% of white patients received treatment; OR=0.57; 95% CI, 0.48–0.68). The interaction between race and clinical benefit was significant (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Racial disparities were largest among men most likely to benefit from treatment. However, a substantial proportion of both black and white men with a low clinical benefit received treatment, indicating a high level of overtreatment.
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies addressing racial disparities in treatment for early-stage prostate cancer have focused on the etiology of undertreatment of black men. Our objective was to determine whether racial disparities are attributable to undertreatment, overtreatment, or both. METHODS: Using the SEER-Medicare dataset, we identified men 67–84 years-old diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 1998 to 2007. We stratified men into clinical benefit groups using tumor aggressiveness and life expectancy. Low-benefit was defined as low-risk tumors and life expectancy <10 years; high-benefit as moderate-risk tumors and life expectancy ≥10 years; all others were intermediate-benefit. Logistic regression modeled the association between race and treatment (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy) across benefit groups. RESULTS: Of 68,817 men (9.8% black and 90.2% white), 56.2% of black and 66.3% of white men received treatment (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=0.65; 95% CI, 0.62–0.69). The percent of low-, intermediate-, and high-benefit men who received treatment was 56.7%, 68.4%, and 79.6%, respectively (P=<0.001). In the low-benefit group, 51.9% of black vs. 57.2% of white patients received treatment (OR=0.74; 95% CI, 0.67–0.81) compared to 57.2% vs. 69.6% in the intermediate-benefit group (OR=0.64; 95% CI, 0.59–0.70). Racial disparity was largest in the high-benefit group (64.2% of black vs. 81.4% of white patients received treatment; OR=0.57; 95% CI, 0.48–0.68). The interaction between race and clinical benefit was significant (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Racial disparities were largest among men most likely to benefit from treatment. However, a substantial proportion of both black and white men with a low clinical benefit received treatment, indicating a high level of overtreatment.
Authors: Willie Underwood; James Jackson; John T Wei; Rodney Dunn; Edmond Baker; Sonya Demonner; David P Wood Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Peter C Albertsen; James A Hanley; George H Barrows; David F Penson; Pam D H Kowalczyk; M Melinda Sanders; Judith Fine Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-09-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Jennifer R Stark; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Gunnar Steineck; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: B A Mahal; M-H Chen; C L Bennett; M W Kattan; O Sartor; K Stein; A V D'Amico; P L Nguyen Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Melisa L Wong; Stuart M Lichtman; Gary R Morrow; John Simmons; Tomma Hargraves; Cary P Gross; Jennifer L Lund; Lisa M Lowenstein; Louise C Walter; Cara L McDermott; Supriya G Mohile; Harvey Jay Cohen Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Megan Hansen; Nadine M Hamieh; Sarah C Markt; Jane B Vaselkiv; Claire H Pernar; Amparo G Gonzalez-Feliciano; Samuel Peisch; Ilkania M Chowdhury-Paulino; Emily M Rencsok; Timothy R Rebbeck; Elizabeth A Platz; Edward L Giovannucci; Kathryn M Wilson; Lorelei A Mucci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Dibash K Das; Michelle Naidoo; Adeodat Ilboudo; Jong Y Park; Thahmina Ali; Konstantinos Krampis; Brian D Robinson; Joseph R Osborne; Olorunseun O Ogunwobi Journal: Exp Cell Res Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 3.905
Authors: Brittaney-Belle E Gordon; Ramsankar Basak; William R Carpenter; Deborah Usinger; Paul A Godley; Ronald C Chen Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 6.860