Literature DB >> 29534197

Using Medicare Claims to Examine Long-term Prostate Cancer Risk of Finasteride in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

Joseph M Unger1, Dawn L Hershman2, Cathee Till1, Catherine M Tangen1, William E Barlow1, Scott D Ramsey1, Phyllis J Goodman1, Ian M Thompson3.   

Abstract

Background: Investigators have used administrative claims to better understand cancer outcomes when a research question cannot feasibly be examined within a study. The Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) showed that seven years of finasteride reduced prostate cancer (PC) risk by 25% in men age 55 years or older. However, it was unclear whether the observed reduction in PC for finasteride participants would be maintained after finasteride discontinuation.
Methods: We examined PC diagnoses identified by PCPT study records and Medicare claims (finasteride = 9423, placebo = 9457). A Medicare-defined PC diagnosis algorithm was defined using diagnosis and procedure codes. Multivariable Cox regression was used to examine time to PC within prespecified follow-up windows (<6.5, 6.5-7.5, and >7.5 years) using time-dependent covariates interacting with intervention assignment to account for the PCPT protocol-specified end-of-study biopsy at seven years. All statistical tests were two-sided.
Results: Median follow-up using the linked database was 16 years. Overall, finasteride arm participants had a 21.1% decrease in the hazard ratio of PC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.84, P < .001). The beneficial effect of finasteride in reducing the hazard ratio of PC was most pronounced in the first 7.5 years (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.77, P < .001), consistent with the original study findings; after 7.5 years, there was no increased risk of PC for finasteride arm participants (HR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.26, P = .18). Conclusions: Finasteride provides a substantial reduction in PC through 16 years of follow-up. There was no strong evidence that the benefit of finasteride diminished after the end-of-study follow-up. Utilizing Medicare claims to augment PCPT follow-up illustrates how the novel use of secondary data sources can enhance the ability to detect long-term outcomes from prospective studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29534197      PMCID: PMC6235685          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  23 in total

1.  The prevention of prostate cancer--the dilemma continues.

Authors:  Peter T Scardino
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-06-24       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  The Cox proportional hazards model with change point: an epidemiologic application.

Authors:  K Y Liang; S G Self; X H Liu
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Ability of Medicare claims data and cancer registries to identify cancer cases and treatment.

Authors:  D K McClish; L Penberthy; M Whittemore; C Newschaffer; D Woolard; C E Desch; S Retchin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1997-02-01       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Adverse Health Events Following Intermittent and Continuous Androgen Deprivation in Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Dawn L Hershman; Joseph M Unger; Jason D Wright; Scott Ramsey; Cathee Till; Catherine M Tangen; William E Barlow; Charles Blanke; Ian M Thompson; Maha Hussain
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 31.777

5.  Administrative data algorithms to identify second breast cancer events following early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Jessica Chubak; Onchee Yu; Gaia Pocobelli; Lois Lamerato; Joe Webster; Marianne N Prout; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; William E Barlow; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-04-30       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Validity of cancer registry data for measuring the quality of breast cancer care.

Authors:  Jennifer L Malin; Katherine L Kahn; John Adams; Lorna Kwan; Marianne Laouri; Patricia A Ganz
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-06-05       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Cancer Statistics, 2017.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 508.702

8.  Validating billing/encounter codes as indicators of lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer recurrence using 2 large contemporary cohorts.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; Debra P Ritzwoller; Nathan Taback; Nikki Carroll; Angel M Cronin; Gladys V Ting; Deb Schrag; Joan L Warren; Mark C Hornbrook; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Potential for cancer related health services research using a linked Medicare-tumor registry database.

Authors:  A L Potosky; G F Riley; J D Lubitz; R M Mentnech; L G Kessler
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Long-term survival of participants in the prostate cancer prevention trial.

Authors:  Ian M Thompson; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; Howard L Parnes; Lori M Minasian; Paul A Godley; M Scott Lucia; Leslie G Ford
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacological Management of Pattern Hair Loss.

Authors:  Sandeep Suresh Sattur; Indu Sandeep Sattur
Journal:  Indian J Plast Surg       Date:  2021-12-13

Review 2.  The Impact of Lifestyle on Prostate Cancer: A Road to the Discovery of New Biomarkers.

Authors:  Catarina Leitão; Bárbara Matos; Fátima Roque; Maria Teresa Herdeiro; Margarida Fardilha
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-22       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 3.  Is Early Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Preferable to Prolonged Medical Therapy: Pros and Cons.

Authors:  Cora Fogaing; Ali Alsulihem; Lysanne Campeau; Jacques Corcos
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 2.430

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.