Daphne Y Lichtensztajn1, Scarlett Lin Gomez2, Weiva Sieh3, Benjamin I Chung4, Iona Cheng5, James D Brooks4. 1. Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, California. Electronic address: Daphne.Lichtensztajn@cpic.org. 2. Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, California; Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 3. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 4. Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 5. Cancer Prevention Institute of California, Fremont, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Asian-American men with prostate cancer have been reported to present with higher grade and later stage disease than white American men. However, Asian-American men comprise a heterogeneous population with distinct health outcomes. We compared prostate cancer risk profiles among the diverse racial and ethnic groups in California. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the California Cancer Registry on 90,845 nonHispanic white, nonHispanic black and Asian-American men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2010. Patients were categorized into low, intermediate and high risk groups based on clinical stage, Gleason score and prostate specific antigen at diagnosis. Using polytomous logistic regression we estimated adjusted ORs for the association of race/ethnicity and nativity with risk group. RESULTS: In addition to the nonHispanic black population, 6 Asian-American groups (United States born Chinese, foreign born Chinese, United States born Japanese, foreign born Japanese, foreign born Filipino and foreign born Vietnamese) were more likely to have an unfavorable risk profile compared to nonHispanic white men. The OR for high vs intermediate risk disease ranged from 1.23 (95% CI 1.02-1.49) for United States born Japanese men to 1.45 (95% CI 1.31-1.60) for foreign born Filipino men. These associations appeared to be driven by higher grade and prostate specific antigen rather than by advanced clinical stage at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, ethnically diverse, population based cohort Asian-American men were more likely to have an unfavorable risk profile at diagnosis. This association varied by racial/ethnic group and nativity, and was not attributable to later stage at diagnosis. This suggests that Asian men may have biological differences that predispose to more severe disease.
PURPOSE: Asian-American men with prostate cancer have been reported to present with higher grade and later stage disease than white American men. However, Asian-American men comprise a heterogeneous population with distinct health outcomes. We compared prostate cancer risk profiles among the diverse racial and ethnic groups in California. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the California Cancer Registry on 90,845 nonHispanic white, nonHispanic black and Asian-American men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2010. Patients were categorized into low, intermediate and high risk groups based on clinical stage, Gleason score and prostate specific antigen at diagnosis. Using polytomous logistic regression we estimated adjusted ORs for the association of race/ethnicity and nativity with risk group. RESULTS: In addition to the nonHispanic black population, 6 Asian-American groups (United States born Chinese, foreign born Chinese, United States born Japanese, foreign born Japanese, foreign born Filipino and foreign born Vietnamese) were more likely to have an unfavorable risk profile compared to nonHispanic white men. The OR for high vs intermediate risk disease ranged from 1.23 (95% CI 1.02-1.49) for United States born Japanese men to 1.45 (95% CI 1.31-1.60) for foreign born Filipinomen. These associations appeared to be driven by higher grade and prostate specific antigen rather than by advanced clinical stage at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, ethnically diverse, population based cohort Asian-American men were more likely to have an unfavorable risk profile at diagnosis. This association varied by racial/ethnic group and nativity, and was not attributable to later stage at diagnosis. This suggests that Asian men may have biological differences that predispose to more severe disease.
Authors: Gerald L Andriole; David G Bostwick; Otis W Brawley; Leonard G Gomella; Michael Marberger; Francesco Montorsi; Curtis A Pettaway; Teuvo L Tammela; Claudio Teloken; Donald J Tindall; Matthew C Somerville; Timothy H Wilson; Ivy L Fowler; Roger S Rittmaster Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-04-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A H Wu; A S Whittemore; L N Kolonel; E M John; R P Gallagher; D W West; J Hankin; C Z Teh; D M Dreon; R S Paffenbarger Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 1995 Oct-Nov Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: David M Latini; Eric P Elkin; Matthew R Cooperberg; Natalia Sadetsky; Janeen Duchane; Peter R Carroll Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ingrid Oakley-Girvan; Laurence N Kolonel; Richard P Gallagher; Anna H Wu; Anna Felberg; Alice S Whittemore Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Scarlett Lin Gomez; Sally L Glaser; Pamela L Horn-Ross; Iona Cheng; Thu Quach; Christina A Clarke; Peggy Reynolds; Salma Shariff-Marco; Juan Yang; Marion M Lee; William A Satariano; Ann W Hsing Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: David J Press; Salma Shariff-Marco; Daphne Y Lichtensztajn; Diane Lauderdale; Adam B Murphy; Pushkar P Inamdar; Mindy C DeRouen; Ann S Hamilton; Juan Yang; Katherine Lin; Donald Hedeker; Christopher A Haiman; Iona Cheng; Scarlett Lin Gomez Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-11-30 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: James D Brooks; Wei Wei; Sarah Hawley; Heidi Auman; Lisa Newcomb; Hilary Boyer; Ladan Fazli; Jeff Simko; Antonio Hurtado-Coll; Dean A Troyer; Peter R Carroll; Martin Gleave; Raymond Lance; Daniel W Lin; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Lawrence D True; Ziding Feng; Jesse K McKenney Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hwang Gyun Jeon; Jae Ho Yoo; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Il Seo; Seong Soo Jeon; Han-Yong Choi; Hyun Moo Lee; Michelle Ferrari; James D Brooks; Benjamin I Chung Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Valentina A Zavala; Paige M Bracci; John M Carethers; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Nicole B Coggins; Marcia R Cruz-Correa; Melissa Davis; Adam J de Smith; Julie Dutil; Jane C Figueiredo; Rena Fox; Kristi D Graves; Scarlett Lin Gomez; Andrea Llera; Susan L Neuhausen; Lisa Newman; Tung Nguyen; Julie R Palmer; Nynikka R Palmer; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Sorbarikor Piawah; Erik J Rodriquez; María Carolina Sanabria-Salas; Stephanie L Schmit; Silvia J Serrano-Gomez; Mariana C Stern; Jeffrey Weitzel; Jun J Yang; Jovanny Zabaleta; Elad Ziv; Laura Fejerman Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 9.075