Jinping Xu1, James Janisse2, Julie Ruterbusch3, Joel Ager2, Kendra L Schwartz2. 1. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA. jxu@med.wayne.edu. 2. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA. 3. Department of Oncology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48021, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Racial differences in prostate cancer treatment patterns have motivated concerns about over- and undertreatment. We surveyed black and white patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) regarding their treatment decision-making processes to gain a better perspective on factors associated with LPC treatment choice. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, cross-sectional survey of 260 men (132 black, 128 white) aged ≤75 years, with newly diagnosed LPC. Our primary outcome was treatment choice (either surgery, radiation, or watchful waiting/active surveillance (WW/AS)), and our primary predictors were race and tumor risk level. RESULTS: Overall, treatment choice did not differ by race. As cancer risk increased, both black and white patients were more likely to undergo surgery and less likely to receive radiation. However, the pattern of WW/AS was different between white and black men. White men were less likely to select WW/AS as cancer risk increased, while risk level was unrelated to black men undergoing WW/AS. Urologist's recommendation had the greatest impact on men's treatment choice, followed by tumor risk level, age, and personal preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no overall racial differences in treatment choice, when stratified by tumor risk level, the pattern of WW/AS was different between white and black patients, suggesting that over- and undertreatment is a larger concern for black than white men. A risk-stratified approach to understand racial disparities in LPC treatment and better strategies to aid black men in their treatment decision-making are needed to reduce racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes.
PURPOSE: Racial differences in prostate cancer treatment patterns have motivated concerns about over- and undertreatment. We surveyed black and white patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) regarding their treatment decision-making processes to gain a better perspective on factors associated with LPC treatment choice. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, cross-sectional survey of 260 men (132 black, 128 white) aged ≤75 years, with newly diagnosed LPC. Our primary outcome was treatment choice (either surgery, radiation, or watchful waiting/active surveillance (WW/AS)), and our primary predictors were race and tumor risk level. RESULTS: Overall, treatment choice did not differ by race. As cancer risk increased, both black and white patients were more likely to undergo surgery and less likely to receive radiation. However, the pattern of WW/AS was different between white and black men. White men were less likely to select WW/AS as cancer risk increased, while risk level was unrelated to black men undergoing WW/AS. Urologist's recommendation had the greatest impact on men's treatment choice, followed by tumor risk level, age, and personal preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no overall racial differences in treatment choice, when stratified by tumor risk level, the pattern of WW/AS was different between white and black patients, suggesting that over- and undertreatment is a larger concern for black than white men. A risk-stratified approach to understand racial disparities in LPC treatment and better strategies to aid black men in their treatment decision-making are needed to reduce racial disparities in prostate cancer outcomes.
Authors: Vickie L Shavers; Martin L Brown; Arnold L Potosky; Carrie N Klabunde; W W Davis; Judd W Moul; Angela Fahey Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Ian Thompson; James Brantley Thrasher; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Michael S Cookson; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine M Tangen Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Steven B Zeliadt; Scott D Ramsey; David F Penson; Ingrid J Hall; Donatus U Ekwueme; Leonard Stroud; Judith W Lee Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ann S Hamilton; Peter C Albertsen; Terri Kang Johnson; Richard Hoffman; Donna Morrell; Dennis Deapen; David F Penson Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-08-24 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jinping Xu; Anne Victoria Neale; Rhonda K Dailey; Susan Eggly; Kendra L Schwartz Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2012 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Mohamed H Kamel; Milan Bimali; Mahmoud I Khalil; Ehab Eltahawy; LJoseph Su; Nabil K Bissada; Rodney Davis Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Jinping Xu; James Janisse; Julie J Ruterbusch; Joel Ager; Joe Liu; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Kendra L Schwartz Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Vandra C Harris; Anne R Links; Jonathan Walsh; Desi P Schoo; Andrew H Lee; David E Tunkel; Emily F Boss Journal: Clin Pediatr (Phila) Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 1.168
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
Authors: Carolyn K Kan; Muhammad M Qureshi; Apar Gupta; Ankit Agarwal; Gretchen A Gignac; B Nicolas Bloch; Nicholas Thoreson; Ariel E Hirsch Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-12-13
Authors: Michael S Simon; Sreejata Raychaudhuri; Lauren M Hamel; Louis A Penner; Kendra L Schwartz; Felicity W K Harper; Hayley S Thompson; Jason C Booza; Michele Cote; Ann G Schwartz; Susan Eggly Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 6.244