Daniel M Frendl1,2, Mara M Epstein3,4,5, Hassan Fouayzi6, Richard Krajenta7, Benjamin A Rybicki7, Mitchell H Sokoloff8. 1. Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. 3. Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. mara.epstein@umassmed.edu. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. mara.epstein@umassmed.edu. 5. Meyers Primary Care Institute, A Joint Endeavor of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Fallon Health, and Reliant Medical Group, Worcester, MA, USA. mara.epstein@umassmed.edu. 6. Meyers Primary Care Institute, A Joint Endeavor of University of Massachusetts Medical School, Fallon Health, and Reliant Medical Group, Worcester, MA, USA. 7. Department of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. 8. Department of Urology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study describes longitudinal trends in the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based testing in two geographically distinct healthcare systems following the 2011 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations against routine PSA screening. METHODS: We analyzed population-based health claims data from 253,139 men aged 40-80 who were enrolled at two US healthcare systems. We assessed trends in the percentage of eligible men receiving ≥ 1 PSA test per year by time period (2000-2008, 2009-2011, 2012-2014), age (40-54, 55-69, 70-80), and race (white, black, other, unknown), and conducted a joinpoint regression analysis. RESULTS: Men aged 55-69 and 70-80 years of all races had similar use of PSA testing between 2000 and 2011, ranging between 47 and 56% of eligible men by year, while only 22-26% of men aged 40-54 had a PSA test per year during this period. Overall, the percentage of men receiving at least one PSA test per year decreased by 26% between 2009-2011 and 2012-2014, with similar trends across race and age groups. PSA testing declined significantly after 2011 (annual percent change = - 11.28). CONCLUSIONS: Following the 2011 USPSTF recommendations against routine PSA screening, declines in PSA testing were observed among men of all races and across all age groups in two large US healthcare systems.
PURPOSE: This study describes longitudinal trends in the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based testing in two geographically distinct healthcare systems following the 2011 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations against routine PSA screening. METHODS: We analyzed population-based health claims data from 253,139 men aged 40-80 who were enrolled at two US healthcare systems. We assessed trends in the percentage of eligible men receiving ≥ 1 PSA test per year by time period (2000-2008, 2009-2011, 2012-2014), age (40-54, 55-69, 70-80), and race (white, black, other, unknown), and conducted a joinpoint regression analysis. RESULTS:Men aged 55-69 and 70-80 years of all races had similar use of PSA testing between 2000 and 2011, ranging between 47 and 56% of eligible men by year, while only 22-26% of men aged 40-54 had a PSA test per year during this period. Overall, the percentage of men receiving at least one PSA test per year decreased by 26% between 2009-2011 and 2012-2014, with similar trends across race and age groups. PSA testing declined significantly after 2011 (annual percent change = - 11.28). CONCLUSIONS: Following the 2011 USPSTF recommendations against routine PSA screening, declines in PSA testing were observed among men of all races and across all age groups in two large US healthcare systems.
Authors: Carol E DeSantis; Rebecca L Siegel; Ann Goding Sauer; Kimberly D Miller; Stacey A Fedewa; Kassandra I Alcaraz; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 508.702
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: James Mohler; Robert R Bahnson; Barry Boston; J Erik Busby; Anthony D'Amico; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Daniel George; Eric Mark Horwitz; Robert P Huben; Philip Kantoff; Mark Kawachi; Michael Kuettel; Paul H Lange; Gary Macvicar; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; Mack Roach; Eric Rohren; Bruce J Roth; Dennis C Shrieve; Matthew R Smith; Sandy Srinivas; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Patrick C Walsh Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Anita D Misra-Hebert; Bo Hu; Eric A Klein; Andrew Stephenson; Glen B Taksler; Michael W Kattan; Michael B Rothberg Journal: BJU Int Date: 2017-02-26 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Edward H Wagner; Sarah M Greene; Gene Hart; Terry S Field; Suzanne Fletcher; Ann M Geiger; Lisa J Herrinton; Mark C Hornbrook; Christine C Johnson; Judy Mouchawar; Sharon J Rolnick; Victor J Stevens; Stephen H Taplin; Dennis Tolsma; Thomas M Vogt Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2005
Authors: Terry S Field; Jackie Cernieux; Diana Buist; Ann Geiger; Lois Lamerato; Gene Hart; Don Bachman; Rick Krajenta; Sarah Greene; Mark C Hornbrook; Gary Ansell; Lisa Herrinton; George Reed Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-01-21 Impact factor: 13.506