Lova Sun1,2, Ravi B Parikh3,4,5, Rebecca A Hubbard6, John Cashy5, Samuel U Takvorian1,2, David J Vaughn1,2, Kyle W Robinson1,2,3, Vivek Narayan1,2, Bonnie Ky2,6,7. 1. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 2. Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 3. Department of Hematology/Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 5. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 6. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 7. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Abstract
Importance: Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality in patients with prostate cancer, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may worsen cardiovascular risk. Adherence to guideline-recommended assessment and management of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) in patients initiating ADT is unknown. Objective: To describe CVRF assessment and management in men with prostate cancer initiating ADT and overall. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of 90 494 men treated within the US Veterans Health Administration diagnosed with prostate cancer between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, was conducted. Participants included men with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and treatment with ADT within 1 year of diagnosis. Data analysis was conducted from September 10, 2019, to July 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of comprehensive CVRF assessment, uncontrolled CVRFs, and untreated CVRFs. Comprehensive CVRF assessment was defined as recorded measures for blood pressure, cholesterol, and glucose levels; CVRF control as blood pressure lower than 140/90 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 130 mg/dL, and hemoglobin A1c less than 7%; and CVRF treatment as receipt of cardiac risk-reducing medications. Multivariable risk difference regression assessed the association between ASCVD and initiation of ADT and these outcomes. Results: Of 90 494 veterans, median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 62-70 years); and 22 700 men (25.1%) received ADT. Overall, 68.1% (95% CI, 67.8%-68.3%) of the men received comprehensive CVRF assessment; 54.1% (95% CI. 53.7%-54.4%) of those assessed had uncontrolled CVRFs, and 29.6% (95% CI, 29.2%-30.0%) of those with uncontrolled CVRFs were not receiving corresponding cardiac risk-reducing medication. Compared with the reference group of patients without ASCVD not receiving ADT, patients with ASCVD not receiving ADT had a 10.4% (95% CI, 9.5%-11.3%) higher probability of comprehensive CVRF assessment, 4.0% (95% CI, 2.9%-5.1%) lower risk of uncontrolled CVRFs, and 22.2% (95% CI, 21.1%-23.3%) lower risk of untreated CVRFs. Similar differences were observed in patients with ASCVD receiving ADT. In contrast, patients without ASCVD receiving ADT had only a 3.0% (95% CI, 2.1%-3.9%) higher probability of comprehensive CVRF assessment, 2.6% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.5%) higher risk of uncontrolled CVRFs, and 5.4% (95% CI, 4.2%-6.6%) lower risk of untreated CVRFs. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that veterans with prostate cancer had a high rate of underassessed and undertreated CVRFs, and ADT initiation was not associated with substantial improvements in CVRF assessment or management. These findings highlight gaps in care and the need for interventions to improve CVRF mitigation in this population.
Importance: Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality in patients with prostate cancer, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may worsen cardiovascular risk. Adherence to guideline-recommended assessment and management of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) in patients initiating ADT is unknown. Objective: To describe CVRF assessment and management in men with prostate cancer initiating ADT and overall. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of 90 494 men treated within the US Veterans Health Administration diagnosed with prostate cancer between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, was conducted. Participants included men with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and treatment with ADT within 1 year of diagnosis. Data analysis was conducted from September 10, 2019, to July 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of comprehensive CVRF assessment, uncontrolled CVRFs, and untreated CVRFs. Comprehensive CVRF assessment was defined as recorded measures for blood pressure, cholesterol, and glucose levels; CVRF control as blood pressure lower than 140/90 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 130 mg/dL, and hemoglobin A1c less than 7%; and CVRF treatment as receipt of cardiac risk-reducing medications. Multivariable risk difference regression assessed the association between ASCVD and initiation of ADT and these outcomes. Results: Of 90 494 veterans, median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 62-70 years); and 22 700 men (25.1%) received ADT. Overall, 68.1% (95% CI, 67.8%-68.3%) of the men received comprehensive CVRF assessment; 54.1% (95% CI. 53.7%-54.4%) of those assessed had uncontrolled CVRFs, and 29.6% (95% CI, 29.2%-30.0%) of those with uncontrolled CVRFs were not receiving corresponding cardiac risk-reducing medication. Compared with the reference group of patients without ASCVD not receiving ADT, patients with ASCVD not receiving ADT had a 10.4% (95% CI, 9.5%-11.3%) higher probability of comprehensive CVRF assessment, 4.0% (95% CI, 2.9%-5.1%) lower risk of uncontrolled CVRFs, and 22.2% (95% CI, 21.1%-23.3%) lower risk of untreated CVRFs. Similar differences were observed in patients with ASCVD receiving ADT. In contrast, patients without ASCVD receiving ADT had only a 3.0% (95% CI, 2.1%-3.9%) higher probability of comprehensive CVRF assessment, 2.6% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.5%) higher risk of uncontrolled CVRFs, and 5.4% (95% CI, 4.2%-6.6%) lower risk of untreated CVRFs. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that veterans with prostate cancer had a high rate of underassessed and undertreated CVRFs, and ADT initiation was not associated with substantial improvements in CVRF assessment or management. These findings highlight gaps in care and the need for interventions to improve CVRF mitigation in this population.
Authors: Urs E Studer; Peter Whelan; Walter Albrecht; Jacques Casselman; Theo de Reijke; Dieter Hauri; Wolfgang Loidl; Santiago Isorna; Subramanian K Sundaram; Muriel Debois; Laurence Collette Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Neil J Stone; Jennifer G Robinson; Alice H Lichtenstein; C Noel Bairey Merz; Conrad B Blum; Robert H Eckel; Anne C Goldberg; David Gordon; Daniel Levy; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Patrick McBride; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Karol Watson; Peter W F Wilson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Claire O'Hanlon; Christina Huang; Elizabeth Sloss; Rebecca Anhang Price; Peter Hussey; Carrie Farmer; Courtney Gidengil Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-07-15 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Neal D Shore; Fred Saad; Michael S Cookson; Daniel J George; Daniel R Saltzstein; Ronald Tutrone; Hideyuki Akaza; Alberto Bossi; David F van Veenhuyzen; Bryan Selby; Xiaolin Fan; Vicky Kang; Jackie Walling; Bertrand Tombal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-05-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Nirmanmoh Bhatia; Marilia Santos; Lee W Jones; Joshua A Beckman; David F Penson; Alicia K Morgans; Javid Moslehi Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Darryl P Leong; Vincent Fradet; Bobby Shayegan; Emmanuelle Duceppe; Robert Siemens; Tamim Niazi; Laurence Klotz; Ian Brown; Joseph Chin; Luke Lavallee; Negareh Mousavi; Patrick Luke; Himu Lukka; Darin Gopaul; Philippe Violette; Rob J Hamilton; Margot K Davis; Sarah Karampatos; Rajibul Mian; Guila Delouya; Yves Fradet; Som Mukherjee; David Conen; Annabel Chen-Tournoux; Christopher Johnson; Amal Bessissow; George Dresser; Adnan Kazi Hameed; Husam Abdel-Qadir; Alp Sener; Raveen Pal; P J Devereaux; Jehonathan Pinthus Journal: J Urol Date: 2020-01-03 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Renato D Lopes; Celestia S Higano; Susan F Slovin; Adam J Nelson; Robert Bigelow; Per S Sørensen; Chiara Melloni; Shaun G Goodman; Christopher P Evans; Jan Nilsson; Deepak L Bhatt; Noel W Clarke; Tine K Olesen; Belinda T Doyle-Olsen; Henriette Kristensen; Lauren Arney; Matthew T Roe; John H Alexander Journal: Circulation Date: 2021-08-30 Impact factor: 39.918
Authors: Young Ae Kim; Su-Hyun Kim; Jae Young Joung; Min Soo Yang; Joung Hwan Back; Sung Han Kim Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Alessandro Sciarra; Gian Maria Busetto; Stefano Salciccia; Francesco Del Giudice; Martina Maggi; Felice Crocetto; Matteo Ferro; Ettore De Berardinis; Roberto Mario Scarpa; Francesco Porpiglia; Luca Carmignani; Rocco Damiano; Walter Artibani; Giuseppe Carrieri Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 5.555