Scott P Kelly1, Stephen K Van Den Eeden2, Richard M Hoffman3, David S Aaronson2, Tania Lobo4, George Luta4, Amethyst D Leimpter5, Jun Shan5, Arnold L Potosky4, Kathryn L Taylor4. 1. Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, D.C.. Electronic address: spk23@georgetown.edu. 2. Department of Urology, Kaiser Oakland Medical Center, Northern California, Oakland, California. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, D.C. 5. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We determined the clinical and sociodemographic predictors of beginning active treatment in an ethnically diverse population of men with low risk prostate cancer initially on observational treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer between 2004 and 2012 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California who did not receive any treatment within the first year of diagnosis and had at least 2 years of followup. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to determine factors associated with time from diagnosis to active treatment. RESULTS: We identified 2,228 eligible men who were initially on observation, of whom 27% began active treatment during followup at a median of 2.9 years. NonHispanic black men were marginally more likely to begin active treatment than nonHispanic white men independent of baseline and followup clinical measures (HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7). Among men who remained on observation nonHispanic black men were rebiopsied within 24 months of diagnosis at a slightly lower rate than nonHispanic white men (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.6-1.0). Gleason grade progression (HR 3.3, 95% CI 2.7-4.1) and PSA doubling time less than 48 months (HR 2.9, 95% CI 2.3-3.7) were associated with initiation of active treatment independent of race. CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic factors such as ethnicity and education may independently influence the patient decision to pursue active treatment and serial biopsies during active surveillance. These factors are important for further studies of prostate cancer treatment decision making.
PURPOSE: We determined the clinical and sociodemographic predictors of beginning active treatment in an ethnically diverse population of men with low risk prostate cancer initially on observational treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer between 2004 and 2012 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California who did not receive any treatment within the first year of diagnosis and had at least 2 years of followup. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to determine factors associated with time from diagnosis to active treatment. RESULTS: We identified 2,228 eligible men who were initially on observation, of whom 27% began active treatment during followup at a median of 2.9 years. NonHispanic black men were marginally more likely to begin active treatment than nonHispanic white men independent of baseline and followup clinical measures (HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7). Among men who remained on observation nonHispanic black men were rebiopsied within 24 months of diagnosis at a slightly lower rate than nonHispanic white men (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.6-1.0). Gleason grade progression (HR 3.3, 95% CI 2.7-4.1) and PSA doubling time less than 48 months (HR 2.9, 95% CI 2.3-3.7) were associated with initiation of active treatment independent of race. CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic factors such as ethnicity and education may independently influence the patient decision to pursue active treatment and serial biopsies during active surveillance. These factors are important for further studies of prostate cancer treatment decision making.
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Stephen Overholser; Matthew Nielsen; Kathleen Torkko; Daniel Cwilka; Brandi Weaver; Xiaoyu Shi; Robin J Leach; Javier Hernandez; Tim Huang; Ian M Thompson; Ian M Thompson Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Marc A Dall'Era; Peter C Albertsen; Christopher Bangma; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Matthew R Cooperberg; Stephen J Freedland; Laurence H Klotz; Christopher Parker; Mark S Soloway Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Debasish Sundi; Ashley E Ross; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; H Ballentine Carter; Edward M Schaeffer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-06-17 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Klaus Eredics; Karl Dorfinger; Gero Kramer; Anton Ponholzer; Stephan Madersbacher Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Samuel L Washington; John Neuhaus; Maxwell V Meng; Sima P Porten Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2019-05-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Hari T Vigneswaran; Luke Mittelstaedt; Alessio Crippa; Martin Eklund; Adriana Vidal; Stephen J Freedland; Michael R Abern Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Aaron T Seaman; Kathryn L Taylor; Kimberly Davis; Kenneth G Nepple; John H Lynch; Anthony D Oberle; Ingrid J Hall; Robert J Volk; Heather Schacht Reisinger; Richard M Hoffman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Julie Y An; Abhinav Sidana; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J. Wood; Peter A Pinto; İsmail Barış Türkbey Journal: Balkan Med J Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 2.021