Timothy P Quinn1, Martin G Sanda1,2, David H Howard3, Dattatraya Patil1, Christopher P Filson1,2. 1. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. Winship Cancer Institute, Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Department of Health Policy and Management, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate improves detection of significant tumors, while decreasing detection of less-aggressive tumors. Therefore, its use has been increasing over time. In this study, the use of prebiopsy MRI among Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer was examined. It was hypothesized that patients of color and those in isolated areas would be less likely to undergo this approach for cancer detection. METHODS: Using cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program linked to billing claims for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer were identified from 2010 through 2015 with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <30 ng/mL. Outcome was prebiopsy MRI of the prostate performed within 6 months before diagnosis (ie, Current Procedural Terminology 72197). Exposures were patient race/ethnicity and rural/urban status. Multivariable regression estimated the odds of prebiopsy prostate MRI. Post hoc analyses examined associations with the registry-level proportion of non-Hispanic Black patients and MRI use, as well as disparities in MRI use in registries with data on more frequent use of prostate MRI. RESULTS: There were 50,719 men identified with prostate cancer (mean age, 72.1 years). Overall, 964 men (1.9% of cohort) had a prebiopsy MRI. Eighty percent of patients with prebiopsy MRI lived in California, New Jersey, or Connecticut. Non-Hispanic Black men (0.6% vs 2.1% non-Hispanic White; odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.40) and men in less urban areas (1.1% vs 2.2% large metro; OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.97) were less likely to have prebiopsy MRI of the prostate. CONCLUSIONS: Non-Hispanic Black patients with prostate cancer and those in less urban areas were less likely to have prebiopsy MRI of the prostate during its initial adoption as a tool for improving prostate cancer detection.
BACKGROUND: Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate improves detection of significant tumors, while decreasing detection of less-aggressive tumors. Therefore, its use has been increasing over time. In this study, the use of prebiopsy MRI among Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer was examined. It was hypothesized that patients of color and those in isolated areas would be less likely to undergo this approach for cancer detection. METHODS: Using cancer registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program linked to billing claims for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer were identified from 2010 through 2015 with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <30 ng/mL. Outcome was prebiopsy MRI of the prostate performed within 6 months before diagnosis (ie, Current Procedural Terminology 72197). Exposures were patient race/ethnicity and rural/urban status. Multivariable regression estimated the odds of prebiopsy prostate MRI. Post hoc analyses examined associations with the registry-level proportion of non-Hispanic Black patients and MRI use, as well as disparities in MRI use in registries with data on more frequent use of prostate MRI. RESULTS: There were 50,719 men identified with prostate cancer (mean age, 72.1 years). Overall, 964 men (1.9% of cohort) had a prebiopsy MRI. Eighty percent of patients with prebiopsy MRI lived in California, New Jersey, or Connecticut. Non-Hispanic Black men (0.6% vs 2.1% non-Hispanic White; odds ratio [OR], 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.40) and men in less urban areas (1.1% vs 2.2% large metro; OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.97) were less likely to have prebiopsy MRI of the prostate. CONCLUSIONS: Non-Hispanic Black patients with prostate cancer and those in less urban areas were less likely to have prebiopsy MRI of the prostate during its initial adoption as a tool for improving prostate cancer detection.
Authors: Nicole E Curci; Brian R Lane; Prasad R Shankar; Sabrina L Noyes; Andrew K Moriarity; Anthony Kubat; Chris Brede; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Gregory B Auffenberg; David C Miller; James E Montie; Arvin K George; Matthew S Davenport Journal: Urology Date: 2018-04-10 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Marc A Bjurlin; Peter R Carroll; Scott Eggener; Pat F Fulgham; Daniel J Margolis; Peter A Pinto; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Jonathan N Rubenstein; Daniel B Rukstalis; Samir S Taneja; Baris Turkbey Journal: J Urol Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Avinash Maganty; Lindsay M Sabik; ZhaoJun Sun; Kirsten Y Eom; Jie Li; Benjamin J Davies; Bruce L Jacobs Journal: J Urol Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Yun-Sok Ha; Amirali Salmasi; Michael Karellas; Eric A Singer; Jeong Hyun Kim; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Wun-Jae Kim; Dong Hyeon Lee; Isaac Yi Kim Journal: Urology Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Jennifer Hemingway; Danny R Hughes; Richard Duszak; Bibb Allen; Jeffrey C Weinreb Journal: J Urol Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Marianne Schmid; Christian P Meyer; Gally Reznor; Toni K Choueiri; Julian Hanske; Jesse D Sammon; Firas Abdollah; Felix K H Chun; Adam S Kibel; Reginald D Tucker-Seeley; Philip W Kantoff; Stuart R Lipsitz; Mani Menon; Paul L Nguyen; Quoc-Dien Trinh Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Elyn H Wang; James B Yu; Robert Abouassally; Neal J Meropol; Gregory Cooper; Nilay D Shah; Stephen B Williams; Christopher Gonzalez; Marc C Smaldone; Alexander Kutikov; Hui Zhu; Simon P Kim Journal: Urology Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Alexander P Cole; Bjoern J Langbein; Francesco Giganti; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Mark Emberton Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Leonardo D Borregales; Gina DeMeo; Xiangmei Gu; Emily Cheng; Vanessa Dudley; Edward M Schaeffer; Himanshu Nagar; Sigrid Carlsson; Andrew Vickers; Jim C Hu Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Wendy Landier; Electra D Paskett; Katherine B Peters; Janette K Merrill; Jonathan Phillips; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.816