Use of advanced treatment technologies among men at low risk of dying from prostate cancer

Urologist practice divestment from radiation vault ownership and treatment patterns for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Urologists practicing in single-specialty groups with ownership in radiation vaults are more likely to treat men with prostate cancer. The effect of divestment of vault ownership on treatment patterns is unclear.

METHODS

A 20% sample of national Medicare claims was used to perform a retrospective cohort study of men with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2019. Urology practices were categorized by radiation vault ownership as nonowners, continuous owners, and divested owners. The primary outcome was use of local treatment, and the secondary outcome was use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A difference-in-differences framework was used to measure the effect of divestment on outcomes compared to continuous owners. Subgroup analyses assessed outcomes by noncancer mortality risk (high [>50%] vs. low [≤50%]).

RESULTS

Among 72 urology practices that owned radiation vaults, six divested during the study. Divestment led to a decrease in treatment compared with those managed at continuously owning practices (difference-in-differences estimate, -13%; p = .03). The use of IMRT decreased, but this was not statistically significant (difference-in-differences estimate, -10%; p = .13). In men with a high noncancer mortality risk, treatment (difference-in-differences estimate, -28%; p < .001) and use of IMRT (difference-in-differences estimate, -27%; p < .001) decreased after divestment.

CONCLUSIONS

Urology group divestment from radiation vault ownership led to a decrease in prostate cancer treatment. This decrease was most pronounced in men who had a high noncancer mortality risk. This has important implications for health care reform by suggesting that payment programs that encourage constraints on utilization, when appropriate, may be effective in reducing overtreatment.

National Trends in Management of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Deciding whether to treat or conservatively manage patients with prostate cancer is challenging. Recent changes in guidelines, advances in treatment technologies, and policy can influence decision making surrounding management, particularly for those for whom the decision to treat is discretionary. Contemporary trends in management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer are unclear.

METHODS

Using national Medicare data, men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were identified between 2014 and 2019. Patients were classified by 5- and 10-year noncancer mortality risk. Multinomial logistic regression models were fit to assess adjusted trends in management over time. The primary outcome was management of prostate cancer: local treatment (inclusive of surgery, radiation, brachytherapy, or cryotherapy), hormone therapy, or observation.

RESULTS

Local treatment was the most common form of management and stable across years (68%). Use of observation increased (21%-23%, P < .001) and use of hormone therapy decreased (11%-8%, P < 0.001). After stratifying by 10-year non-cancer mortality risk, observation increased among men with low (22.3%-26.1%, P < .001) and moderate (19.9%-23.5%, P < .001) mortality risk. Conversely, use of treatment increased among those with high (62.8%-68.0%, P = .004) and very high (45.5%-54.1%, P < .001) risk of noncancer mortality. These trends were similar across groups when stratified by 5-year noncancer mortality risk.

CONCLUSION

Nationally, use of local treatment remains common and was stable throughout the study period. However, while local treatment declined among men with a lower risk of noncancer mortality, it increased among men with a higher risk of non-cancer mortality.

Dosimetric Comparison Study of Proton Therapy Using Line Scanning versus Passive Scattering and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

The proton irradiation modality has transitioned from passive scattering (PS) to pencil beam scanning. Nevertheless, the documented outcomes predominantly rely on PS.

METHODS

Thirty patients diagnosed with prostate cancer were selected to assess treatment planning across line scanning (LS), PS, and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Dose constraints encompassed clinical target volume (CTV) D98 ≥ 73.0 Gy (RBE), rectal wall V65 < 17% and V40 < 35%, and bladder wall V65 < 25% and V40 < 50%. The CTV, rectal wall, and bladder wall dose volumes were calculated and evaluated using the Freidman test.

RESULTS

The LS technique adhered to all dose limitations. For the rectal and bladder walls, 10 (33.3%) and 21 (70.0%) patients in the PS method and 5 (16.7%) and 1 (3.3%) patients in VMAT, respectively, failed to meet the stipulated requirements. The wide ranges of the rectal and bladder wall volumes (V10-70) were lower with LS than with PS and VMAT. LS outperformed VMAT across all dose-volume rectal and bladder wall indices.

CONCLUSION

The LS method demonstrated a reduction in rectal and bladder doses relative to PS and VMAT, thereby suggesting the potential for mitigating toxicities.

Association Between Urologist Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Performance and Quality of Prostate Cancer Care

INTRODUCTION

We performed a study to evaluate the association between urologist performance in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), and quality and spending for prostate cancer care.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2017 and 2019 were assigned to their primary urologist. Associated MIPS scores were identified and categorized based on thresholds for payment adjustment as low (worst), moderate, and high (best). Multivariable mixed effects models were used to measure the association between MIPS performance and adherence to quality measures and price standardized spending for prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Adherence to quality measures did not vary across MIPS performance groups for pretreatment counselling by both a urologist and radiation oncologist (low-76%, [95% CI 73%-80%], moderate-77% [95% CI 74%-79%], and high-75% [95% CI 74%-76%]) and avoiding treatment in men with a high risk of noncancer mortality within 10 years of diagnosis (low-40% [95% CI 35%-45%], moderate-39% [95% CI 36%-43%], high-38% [95% CI 36%-39%]). Men on active surveillance managed by high performers more likely received a confirmatory test (44% [95% CI 43%-46%]) compared to those managed by moderate (38% [95% CI 33%-42%]) performers, but not low performers (36% [95% CI 29%-44%]). There was no difference in adjusted spending across MIPS performance groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Better performance in MIPS is associated with a higher rate of confirmatory testing in men initiating active surveillance for prostate cancer. However, performance was not associated with other dimensions of quality nor spending.

The immediate effects of private equity acquisition of urology practices on the management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Some worry that physician practices acquired by private equity may increase the use of services to maximize revenue. We assessed the effects of private equity acquisition on spending, use of treatment, and diagnostic testing in men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

We used a 20% sample of national Medicare claims to perform a retrospective cohort study of men with prostate cancer diagnosed from 2014 through 2019. The primary outcome was prostate cancer spending in the first 12 months after diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included the use of treatment and a composite measure of diagnostic testing (e.g., imaging, genomics) in the first 12 months after diagnosis. Multilevel modeling was used to adjust for differences in patient and market characteristics. The effect of practice acquisition on each outcome was assessed using a difference-in-differences design.

RESULTS

There were 409 and 4021 men with prostate cancer managed by urologists in acquired and nonacquired practices, respectively. After acquisition, prostate cancer spending was comparable between acquired and nonacquired practices (difference-in-differences estimate $1182, p = 0.36). Acquisition did not affect the use of treatment (difference-in-differences estimate 3.7%, p = 0.30) or the use of diagnostic testing in men who were treated (difference-in-differences -5.5%, p = 0.12) and those managed conservatively (difference-in-differences -2.0%, p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

In the year following acquisition of urology practices, private equity did not increase prostate cancer spending, the use of treatment or diagnostic testing in men with prostate cancer. Future work should evaluate the effects of private equity acquisition on practice patterns and quality over a longer time horizon.

Practice Competition and Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of urology practice market competition on use of treatment in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective national cohort study of 48,067 Medicare beneficiaries with newly diagnosed prostate cancer between 2014 and 2018. The primary exposure was urology practice-level market competition. Markets were established by the flow of patients to a practice using a variable radius approach. Practice level competition was measured annually using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. The primary outcome was use of treatment for prostate cancer (ie, surgery, radiation, or cryotherapy) stratified by 10-year risk of noncancer mortality.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2018, there was a decrease in the total percent of urologists practicing in small single-specialty groups (49%-41%) with an increase in multispecialty practices (38%-47%). After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, a lower percentage of men underwent treatment in practices with low competition relative to those managed in practices with high competition (70% vs 67.0%, P < .001). Among men with the highest risk of noncancer mortality, those managed in practices in the least competitive markets were less likely to receive treatment relative to men managed by practices in the most competitive markets (48% vs 60%, P-value<.001).

CONCLUSION

Reduction in competition between urology practices is not associated with greater use of treatment in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, particularly in those with a high risk of noncancer mortality.

Impact of Robotic Technologies on Prostate Cancer Patients' Choice for Radical Treatment

Prostate cancer (PCa) surgery has a strong impact on men's social and sexual lives. For this reason, many patients ask for robotic surgery. To assess the rate of lost patients due to the lack of a robotic platform (RPl) at our center, we retrospectively selected 577 patients who underwent prostate biopsy between 2020 and 2021 who were eligible for radical prostatectomy (RP) (ISUP ≥ 2; age ≤ 70 yr). Patients eligible for surgery who decided to be operated received a phone call interview asking the reason for their choice. Overall, 230 patients (31.7%) underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical prostatectomy (LaRP) at our center, while 494 patients (68.3%) were not treated in our hospital. Finally, 347 patients were included: 87 patients (25.1%) underwent radiotherapy; 59 patients (17%) were already under another urologist's care; 113 patients (32.5%) underwent robotic surgery elsewhere; and 88 patients (25.4%) followed the suggestion of friends or relatives based on their surgical experience. Despite no surgical technique for RP having shown superiority in terms of oncological or functional outcomes, patients eligible for PCa treatment decided to be operated on elsewhere because of the lack of an RPl. Our results show how the presence of an RPl may increase the case volume of RP by 49% at our center.

Overcoming Drug Resistance in Advanced Prostate Cancer by Drug Repurposing

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men. Common treatments include active surveillance, surgery, or radiation. Androgen deprivation therapy and chemotherapy are usually reserved for advanced disease or biochemical recurrence, such as castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), but they are not considered curative because PCa cells eventually develop drug resistance. The latter is achieved through various cellular mechanisms that ultimately circumvent the pharmaceutical’s mode of action. The need for novel therapeutic approaches is necessary under these circumstances. An alternative way to treat PCa is by repurposing of existing drugs that were initially intended for other conditions. By extrapolating the effects of previously approved drugs to the intracellular processes of PCa, treatment options will expand. In addition, drug repurposing is cost-effective and efficient because it utilizes drugs that have already demonstrated safety and efficacy. This review catalogues the drugs that can be repurposed for PCa in preclinical studies as well as clinical trials.

Patterns of Care and Outcomes for Non-Metastatic Prostate Cancer in the United States: Results of the CancerMPact® Survey 2018

Purpose

We describe patterns of care and treatment outcomes for non-metastatic PCa (nmPCA), either hormone-sensitive or castration-resistant, in the United States of America (USA) in 2018.

Methods

A survey (CancerMPact^®) recruited physicians nationwide to answer an online questionnaire about how they treated patients with nmPCA. Questions covered aspects of treatment at all disease stages. Board-certified urologists and oncologists with at least five years of clinical practice and who treated at least 30 PCa patients monthly were included.

Results

The survey included responses from ninety-four physicians with an average of 17.5 years of clinical practice, who had treated a combined average of 4415 patients with nmPCA per month in 2018. Approximately 40% of patients in stage I were managed with either active surveillance or observation/no therapy, decreasing to 20%, 8% and 6% in stages II, III and IV(M0), respectively. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy was favored over other radiotherapy modalities, with rates of use ranging between 60% and 69% depending on disease stage. Leuprolide as monotherapy or in combination with enzalutamide, abiraterone or bicalutamide were the most common systemic treatment options for non-metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (nmHSPC) patients with the first or second recurrence. Only 16.5% of non-metastatic castration-resistant PCa (nmCRPC) patients did not relapse within five years of initial therapy for nmCRPC.

Conclusion

While PCa treatment recommendations are rapidly changing due to advances in treatment, we observed great concordance between their most current versions and real-world data treatment patterns reported by US physicians.

Bladder filling volume variation between the first and second day of planning computed tomography for prostate cancer radiation therapy and correlation with renal function

AIM

During radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer, bladder filling helps exclude the organ from irradiation and reduces adverse effects. For RT planning, we performed computed tomography (CT) for 2 consecutive days to evaluate inter-day variations in organs such as the bladder. However, the patient factors that are associated with large intra-patient variations in bladder filling volume prior to RT are not known.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 97 prostate cancer patients who underwent CT for 2 consecutive days for RT planning between March 2015 and March 2020 and with confirmed water intake volume before the scans. Patients consumed 500 ml of water immediately after urination and underwent CT 30 min after the start of water intake; CT was performed under similar conditions over 2 consecutive days. Patient information was collected from the medical records taken before CT.

RESULTS

The median bladder filling volume was 102.8 cm³ (range: 31.7-774.0), and the median intra-patient bladder filling volume variation was 23.4 cm³ (range: 0.4-277.7). Univariate analysis revealed that the intra-patient variation was significantly larger in patients with an eGFR higher than the median (p = 0.003). No other factor showed correlations with the variation. As the larger bladder filling volume of the 2 consecutive days in patients increased (median 121.5 cm³ , range: 47.8-774.0), the intra-patient variation also increased.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a higher eGFR show greater variation in bladder filling volume, and caution should be exercised when applying RT in these patients.

Aortic valve replacement among patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has made palliation from aortic stenosis more broadly available to populations previously thought to be too high risk for surgery, such as those with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD); however, its safety and effectiveness in this context are uncertain.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of national Medicare beneficiaries, aged 66 and older with Parts A and B, between 2010 and 2016. Patients undergoing AVR were identified, and follow-up was available through 2017. Multivariable regression was used to measure the independent association between having a diagnosis of ADRD at the time of AVR, stratified by TAVR and surgery, and outcomes (mortality and Medicare institutional days at 1 year after AVR).

RESULTS

The average rate of increase in AVR per year was 17.5 cases per 100,000 ADRD and 8.4 per 100,000 non-ADRD beneficiaries, largely driven by more rapid adoption of TAVR. Adjusted mortality following AVR declined significantly between those treated in 2010 and 2016, from 13.5% (95% CI 10.2%-17.7%) to 6.3% (95% CI 5.2%-7.6%) and from 13.7% (95% CI 12.7%-14.7%) to 6.3% (95% CI 5.8%-6.9%) in those with and without ADRD, respectively. The sharpest decline was noted for patients undergoing TAVR between 2011 and 2016, with adjusted mortality declining from 19.9% (95% CI 11.2%-32.8%) to 5.2% (95% CI 4.1%-6.5%) and from 12.2% (95% CI 9.3%-15.8%) to 5.0% (95% CI 4.4%-5.6%) in patients with and without ADRD, respectively. Similar declines were evident for Medicare institutional days in the year after AVR in both patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of AVR in those with ADRD increased during the past decade largely driven by the diffusion of TAVR. The use of TAVR in this vulnerable population did not come at the expense of increasing Medicare institutional days or mortality at 1-year.

Clinical predictors of severe late urinary toxicity after curative intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer

Intractable late urinary toxicity is a serious complication after radiotherapy for patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC). We assessed clinical factors correlated with severe late urinary toxicity in LPC treated with curative image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A total of 452 patients with LPC treated with IMRT between 2002 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 432 patients received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The median total irradiated doses were 80 (range, 76-80) Gy. Each daily dose was 2 Gy per fraction. The median follow-up was 83 (range, 4-210) months. Late urinary toxicity was scored according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 4.03. Grade 3 late urinary toxicity was observed in 27 patients. No cases with grade ≥ 4 late urinary toxicity were observed. The 5-, 10-, and 12.5-year grade 3 late urinary toxicity-free survival rates were 97%, 91.8% and 88.1%, respectively. Age, risk classification, total irradiated dose, ADT duration, antithrombotic therapy (AT), cardiovascular disease, hypertension (HT), diabetes mellitus (DM), dyslipidemia (DL), prior transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and prior high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) were investigated for correlations with grade 3 late urinary toxicity. In univariate analysis, AT and prior HIFU and no other studied factors, were correlated with grade 3 late urinary toxicity. AT and prior HIFU appear to be predictive of grade 3 late urinary toxicity. Patients with LPC with these relevant clinical factors should be carefully followed up by sharing detailed information with the urology department.

Perceived barriers to the adoption of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer: a qualitative analysis of community and academic urologists

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines recommend active surveillance as the preferred treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer, but only a minority of eligible men receive active surveillance, and practice variation is substantial. The aim of this study is to describe barriers to urologists' recommendation of active surveillance in low-risk prostate cancer and explore variation of barriers by setting.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews among 22 practicing urologists, evenly distributed between academic and community practice. We coded barriers to active surveillance according to a conceptual model of determinants of treatment quality to identify potential opportunities for intervention.

RESULTS

Community and academic urologists were generally in agreement on factors influencing active surveillance. Urologists perceived patient-level factors to have the greatest influence on recommendations, particularly tumor pathology, patient age, and judgements about the patient's ability to adhere to follow-up protocols. They also noted cross-cutting clinical barriers, including concerns about the adequacy of biopsy samples, inconsistent protocols to guide active surveillance, and side effects of biopsy procedures. Urologists had differing opinions on the impact of environmental factors, such as financial disincentives and fear of litigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite national and international recommendations, both academic and community urologists note a variety of barriers to implementing active surveillance in low risk prostate cancer. These barriers will need to be specifically addressed in efforts to help urologists offer active surveillance more consistently.

Regional Adoption of Commercial Gene Expression Testing for Prostate Cancer

Importance

Although tissue-based genomic tests can aid in treatment decision-making for patients with prostate cancer, little is known about their clinical adoption.

Objective

To evaluate regional adoption of genomic testing for prostate cancer and understand common trajectories of uptake shared by regions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This dynamic cohort study of patients diagnosed with prostate cancer used administrative claims from Blue Cross Blue Shield Axis, the largest source of commercial health insurance in the US, to characterize temporal trends in the use of commercial, tissue-based genomic testing and calculate the proportion of tested patients at the hospital referral region (HRR) level. Eligible patients from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2018, were those aged 40 to 89 years with prostate cancer diagnosed from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Group-based trajectory modeling was used to classify regions according to discrete trajectories of adoption of commercial, tissue-based genomic testing for prostate cancer. Across regions with distinct trajectories, HRR-level sociodemographic and health care contextual characteristics were compared, using data previously calculated among Medicare beneficiaries.

Results

A total of 92 418 men with prostate cancer who met inclusion criteria were identified; the median (interquartile range) age at diagnosis was 60 (56-63) years. Overall, the proportion of patients who received genomic testing increased from 0.8% in July 2012 to June 2013 to 11.3% in July 2017 to June 2018. Trajectory modeling identified 5 distinct regional trajectories of genomic testing adoption. Although less than 1% of patients in each group were tested at baseline, group 1 (lowest adoption) increased to 4.0%. Groups 2 (7.8%), 3 (14.6%), and 4 (17.3%) experienced more modest growth, while in group 5 (highest adoption), use increased to 33.8% of patients tested from June 2017 to July 2018. Compared with regions that more slowly adopted testing, HRRs with the highest rate of adoption (group 5) had higher HRR-level education measures (percentage [SD] with college education: group 1, 25.6% [4.8%]; vs group 2, 27.5% [7.3%]; vs group 3, 30.3% [9.1%]; vs group 4, 29.8% [8.2%]; vs group 5, 30.4% [11.4%]; P for trend = .03), median (SD) household income (group 1, $50 412.8 [$6907.4]; vs group 2, $54 419.6 [$11 324.5]; vs group 3, $61 424.0 [$17 723.8]; vs group 4, $58 508.3 [$15 174.6]; vs group 5, $58 367.0 [$13 180.5]; P for trend = .005), and prostate cancer resources, including clinician density (No. [SD] of clinicians per 100 000: group 1, 2.5 [0.3]; vs group 2, 2.5 [0.5]; vs group 3, 2.6 [0.5]; vs group 4, 2.7 [0.7]; vs group 5, 2.6 [0.5]; P for trend = .04) and prostate cancer screening (percentage [SD] of prostate-specific antigen testing among patients aged 68-74 y: group 1, 29.4% [11.8%]; vs group 2, 32.4% [11.2%]; vs group 3, 33.1% [12.7%]; vs group 4, 36.1% [9.7%]; vs group 5, 28.8% [11.8%]; P for trend = .05).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with prostate cancer, the adoption of commercial tissue-based genomic testing for prostate cancer was highly variable in the US at the regional level and may be associated with contextual measures related to socioeconomic status and patterns of prostate cancer care. These findings highlight factors underlying differential adoption of prognostic technologies for patients with cancer.

Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and the Adoption of New Surgical Technology

BACKGROUND

Dissemination of new surgical technology is a major contributor to healthcare spending growth. Accountable care organization (ACO) policy aims to control spending while maintaining quality. As a result, ACOs provide incentive for hospitals to selectively adopt newer procedures with high value.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims from 2010 to 2015. We identified hospitals that performed 1 of 6 sets of procedures: abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, aortic valve replacement, carotid endarterectomy or stent, lung lobectomy, colectomy, and prostatectomy. We identified hospitals participating in a Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO and a set of matched non-ACO control hospitals. We used a difference-in-differences approach to compare rate of surgical treatment and use of newer surgical technology for each set of procedures in ACO and non-ACO hospitals.

RESULTS

We included 707 ACO-hospitals and 1,770 control hospitals. ACO hospitals performed surgery for carotid stenosis at a lower rate than non-ACO hospitals. There was no difference in the rate of surgical treatment for all other procedure sets. ACO hospitals were less likely to use an endovascular approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (85.2% vs 88.2%, p < 0.001) and more likely to use a minimally invasive approach for lung lobectomy (42.2% vs 34.7%, p = 0.004) than non-ACO hospitals. In difference-in-differences analysis, ACO participation was not associated with any significant difference in use of surgical care for any of the 6 procedure sets, nor with any significant difference in use of newer surgical technology.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite ACO policy incentives to selectively adopt newer surgical technology, ACO participation was not associated with differences in rate of surgery or use of newer surgical technology for 6 major surgical procedures.

Physician and facility drivers of spending variation in locoregional prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer, with a wide range of treatment options. Payment reform to reduce unnecessary spending variation is an important strategy for reducing waste, but its magnitude and drivers within prostate cancer are unknown.

METHODS

In total, 38,971 men aged ≥66 years with localized prostate cancer who were enrolled in Medicare fee-for-service and were included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database from 2009 to 2014 were included. Multilevel linear regression with physician and facility random effects was used to examine the contributions of urologists, radiation oncologists, and their affiliated facilities to variation in total patient spending in the year after diagnosis within geographic region. The authors assessed whether spending variation was driven by patient characteristics, disease risk, or treatments. Physicians and facilities were sorted into quintiles of adjusted patient-level spending, and differences between those that were high-spending and low-spending were examined.

RESULTS

Substantial variation in spending was driven by physician and facility factors. Differences in cancer treatment modalities drove more variation across physicians than differences in patient and disease characteristics (72% vs 2% for urologists, 20% vs 18% for radiation oncologists). The highest spending physicians spent 46% more than the lowest and had more imaging tests, inpatient care, and radiotherapy spending. There were no differences across spending quintiles in the use of robotic surgery by urologists or the use of brachytherapy by radiation oncologists.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences were observed for patients with similar demographics and disease characteristics. This variation across both physicians and facilities suggests that efforts to reduce unnecessary spending must address decision making at both levels.

Dose-time fractionation schedules of preoperative radiotherapy and timing to surgery for rectal cancer

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is extensively used prior to surgery for rectal cancer to provide significantly better local control, but the radiotherapy (RT), as the other component of CRT, has been subject to less interest than the drug component in recent years. With considerable developments in RT, the use of advanced techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in rectal cancer, is garnering more attention nowadays. The radiation dose can be better conformed to the target volumes with possibilities for synchronous integrated boost without increased complications in normal tissue. Hopefully, both local recurrence and toxicities can be further reduced. Although those seem to be of interest, many issues remain unresolved. There is no international consensus regarding the radiation schedule for preoperative RT for rectal cancer. Moreover, an enormous disparity exists regarding the RT delivery. With the advent of IMRT, variations will likely increase. Moreover, time to surgery is also quite variable, as it depends upon the indication for RT/CRT in the clinical practices. In this review, we discuss the options and problems related to both the dose-time fractionation schedule and time to surgery; furthermore, it addresses the research questions that need answering in the future.

The Development and Validation of Prostate Cancer-specific Physician-Hospital Networks

OBJECTIVE

To develop prostate cancer-specific physician-hospital networks to define hospital-based units that more accurately group hospitals, providers, and the patients they serve.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare, we identified men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2007 and 2011. We created physician-hospital networks by assigning each patient to a physician and each physician to a hospital based on treatment patterns. We assessed content validity by examining characteristics of hospitals anchoring the physician-hospital networks and of the patients associated with these hospitals.

RESULTS

We identified 42,963 patients associated with 344 physician-hospital networks. Networks anchored by a teaching hospital (compared to a nonteaching hospital) had higher median numbers of prostate cancer patients (117 [interquartile range {71-189} vs 82 {50-126}]) and treating physicians (7 [4-11] vs 4 [3-6]) (both P <0.001). On average, patients traveled farther to networks anchored by a teaching hospital (49 miles [standard deviation] [207] vs 41 [183]; P <.001). Hospitals known as high-volume centers for robotic prostatectomies, proton-beam therapy, and active surveillance had network rates for these procedures well above the mean. Hospitals known as safety net providers served higher proportions of minorities.

CONCLUSION

We empirically developed prostate-cancer specific physician-hospital networks that exhibit content validity and are relevant from a clinical and policy perspective. They have the potential to become targets for policy interventions focused on improving the delivery of prostate cancer care.

Episode Payments for Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Aortic stenosis is the most common valvular heart disease in the United States. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly being adopted as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). In an era of value-based payment reform, our objective was to better understand the economic impact of the use of TAVR and SAVR in the United States.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent TAVR or SAVR between 2012 and 2015. Using claims from a 20% sample of national fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, we calculated episode payments for patients who underwent aortic valve replacement from 90 days before aortic valve replacement through 90 days after hospital discharge. Among 18 804 eligible patients, 6455 underwent TAVR (34.3%), and 12 349 underwent SAVR (65.7%). After adjustment for patient characteristics, episode payments for TAVR were ≈7% lower than for SAVR (TAVR, $55 545 [95% CI, $54 643-56 446] versus $59 467 [95% CI, $58 723-60 211]; P<0.001). Patients with TAVR had higher preprocedural payments, but lower payments during and after the index hospitalization for the procedure. Episode payments increased with increasing comorbidity score for patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR (rate ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.15-1.17]; P<0.001); however, this association was stronger for SAVR (rate ratio, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.17-1.19]) than for TAVR (rate ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.11-1.12]; P<0.001 for interaction). Thus, differences in episode payments between TAVR and SAVR were greatest for the sickest patients but much less in healthier patients.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR is associated with lower episode payments than SAVR. However, episode payments for TAVR are less influenced by patient comorbidity. Therefore, as TAVR is increasingly used in patients with better baseline health status, the economic advantages of TAVR relative to SAVR may diminish.

The role of hypofractionated radiotherapy for the definitive treatment of localized prostate cancer: early results of a randomized trial

Background: Prostate cancer is considered to have a special biology which could affect the radiation therapy result based on the selected fractionation scheme. We present the preliminary results of a randomized trial comparing conventionally and hypofractionated radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Methods: Patients included in the study had localized prostate cancer (cT1c-T3bN0M0) and were randomly assigned to mild hypofractionated (72 Gy in 32 fractions, arm1) or conventionally fractionated (74 Gy in 37 fractions, arm2) radiation therapy treatment with Volumetric Arc Therapy technique. The treatment was delivered only to the prostate with or without the seminal vesicles according to physician's discretion and hormone therapy was optional according to the disease stage and comorbidities. Here we present the preliminary results of acute toxicity from the gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) system.

Results: Between 2015 and 2016, 139 patients were enrolled. 67 patients were treated with conventional fractionation and 72 were treated with hypofractionation. Grade≥ 2 toxicity from GU and GI was observed in 23 and 21 patients (31,9% vs 31,3%, p=0,79) and 15 and 12 (20,8% vs 17,9%, p=0,6) for arm1 and arm2 respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between arms in the incidence of early toxicity. There was no correlation observed between patient characteristics and toxicity from either GU or GI.

Conclusions: Hypofractionated radiotherapy appears to be equally tolerated compared to conventional fractionation in the early setting. Longer follow up is needed to assess the late toxicity profile of the patients and any potential differences between the control and experimental arm.

Treatment patterns of high-dose-rate and low-dose-rate brachytherapy as monotherapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Monotherapy with high-dose-rate (HDR) or low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy are both recommended modalities for prostate cancer. The choice between HDR and LDR is dependent on patient, physician, and hospital preferences. We sought to identify treatment patterns and factors associated with receipt of HDR or LDR monotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with localized low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with HDR or LDR monotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patterns of HDR vs. LDR. Patient characteristics were correlated with HDR vs. LDR using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 50,326 patients from 2004-2014: LDR 37,863 (75.2%) vs. HDR 12,463 (24.8%). Median follow-up was 70.3 months. The overall use of monotherapy declined over time. HDR application declined relative to LDR. In 2004, 27.0% of cases were HDR compared to 19.2% in 2014. Factors associated with increased likelihood of HDR on multivariable analysis included: increasing age (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.01-1.01), cT2c disease (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.11-1.41), treatment at an academic center (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 2.24-2.65), non-white race (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.27-1.42), and income > $63,000 (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.59-1.88). LDR was more common in 2010-2014 (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.54-0.65), Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index > 0 (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.84-0.95), and for patients receiving hormone therapy (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.83-0.93). No difference in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or Gleason score and receipt of HDR vs. LDR was observed. Mean overall survival was 127.0 months for HDR and 125.4 for LDR, and was not statistically different.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed an overall decrease in brachytherapy (BT) monotherapy use since 2004 for localized prostate cancer. Despite similar survival outcomes, the use of HDR monotherapy declined relative to LDR.

The Influence of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Adoption on Prostate Cancer Treatment Patterns

PURPOSE

To our knowledge it is unknown whether stereotactic body radiation therapy of prostate cancer is a substitute for other radiation treatments or surgery, or for expanding the pool of patients who undergo treatment instead of active surveillance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare we identified men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2007 and 2011. We developed physician-hospital networks by identifying the treating physician of each patient based on the primary treatment received and subsequently assigning each physician to a hospital. We examined the relative distribution of prostate cancer treatments stratified by whether stereotactic body radiation therapy was performed in a network by fitting logistic regression models with robust SEs to account for patient clustering in networks.

RESULTS

We identified 344 physician-hospital networks, including 30 (8.7%) and 314 (91.3%) in which stereotactic body radiation therapy was and was not performed, respectively. Networks in which that therapy was and was not done did not differ with time in the performance of robotic and radical prostatectomy, and active surveillance (all p >0.05). The relationship with intensity modulated radiation therapy did not show any consistent temporal pattern. In networks in which it was performed less intensity modulated radiation therapy was initially done but there were similar rates in later years. Brachytherapy trends differed among networks in which stereotactic body radiation therapy was vs was not performed with a lower brachytherapy rate in networks in which stereotactic body radiation therapy was done (p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery and active surveillance rates did not differ in networks in which stereotactic body radiation therapy was vs was not performed but when that therapy was done there was a lower brachytherapy rate. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may represent more of an alternative to brachytherapy than to active surveillance.

Association Between Hospital Participation in Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations and Readmission Following Major Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of Medicare Shared Savings Program accountable care organizations (ACOs) on hospital readmission after common surgical procedures.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Hospital readmissions following surgery lead to worse patient outcomes and wasteful spending. ACOs, and their associated hospitals, have strong incentives to reduce readmissions from 2 distinct Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services policies.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using a 20% national Medicare sample to identify beneficiaries undergoing 1 of 7 common surgical procedures-abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, colectomy, cystectomy, prostatectomy, lung resection, total knee arthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty-between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome was 30-day risk-adjusted readmission rate. We performed difference-in-differences analyses using multilevel logistic regression models to quantify the effect of hospital ACO affiliation on readmissions following these procedures.

RESULTS

Patients underwent a procedure at one of 2974 hospitals, of which 389 were ACO affiliated. The 30-day risk-adjusted readmission rate decreased from 8.4% (95% CI, 8.1-8.7%) to 7.0% (95% CI, 6.7-7.3%) for ACO affiliated hospitals (P < 0.001) and from 7.9% (95% CI, 7.8-8.0%) to 7.1% (95% CI, 6.9-7.2%) for non-ACO hospitals (P < 0.001). The difference-in-differences of the 2 trends demonstrated an additional 0.52% (95% CI, 0.97-0.078%) absolute reduction in readmissions at ACO hospitals (P = 0.021), which would translate to 4410 hospitalizations avoided.

CONCLUSION

Readmissions following common procedures decreased significantly from 2010 to 2014. Hospital affiliation with Shared Savings ACOs was associated with significant additional reductions in readmissions. This emphasis on readmission reduction is 1 mechanism through which ACOs improve value in a surgical population.

Variation in prostate cancer treatment and spending among Medicare shared savings program accountable care organizations

BACKGROUND

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have been shown to reduce prostate cancer treatment among men unlikely to benefit because of competing risks (ie, potential overtreatment). This study assessed whether the level of engagement in ACOs by urologists affected rates of treatment, overtreatment, and spending.

METHODS

A 20% sample of national Medicare data was used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2012 and 2014. The extent of urologist engagement in an ACO, as measured by the proportion of patients in an ACO managed by an ACO-participating urologist, served as the exposure. The use of treatment, potential overtreatment (ie, treatment in men with a ≥75% risk of 10-year noncancer mortality), and average payments in the year after diagnosis for each ACO were modeled.

RESULTS

Among 2822 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, the median rates of treatment and potential overtreatment by an ACO were 71.3% (range, 23.6%-79.5%) and 53.6% (range, 12.4%-76.9%), respectively. Average Medicare payments among ACOs in the year after diagnosis ranged from $16,523.52 to $34,766.33. Stronger urologist-ACO engagement was not associated with treatment (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-1.2; P = .4) or spending (9.7% decrease in spending; P = .08). However, urologist engagement was associated with a lower likelihood of potential overtreatment (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.86; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

ACOs vary widely in treatment, potential overtreatment, and spending for prostate cancer. ACOs with stronger urologist engagement are less likely to treat men with a high risk of noncancer mortality, and this suggests that organizations that better engage specialists may be able to improve the value of specialty care. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Impact of Accountable Care Organizations on Diagnostic Testing for Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine if Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) have the potential to accelerate the impact of prostate cancer screening recommendations.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using Medicare data evaluating the rates of PSA testing and prostate biopsy among men without prostate cancer between 2011 and 2014. We assessed PSA testing and biopsy rates before and after policy implementation among patients of ACO and non-ACO-aligned physicians. To control for secular trends, difference-in-differences methods were used to determine the effects of ACO implementation.

RESULTS

We identified 1.1 million eligible men without prostate cancer. From 2011 to 2014, the rates of PSA testing and biopsy declined by 22.3% and 7.0%, respectively. PSA testing declined similarly regardless of ACO participation-from 618 to 530 tests per 1000 beneficiaries among ACO-aligned physicians and from 607 to 516 tests per 1000 beneficiaries among non-ACO-aligned physicians (difference-in-differences P = .11). Whereas rates of prostate biopsy remained constant for patients of non-ACO-aligned physicians at 12 biopsies per 1000 beneficiaries, these rates increased from 11.6 to 12.5 biopsies per 1000 beneficiaries of patients of ACO-aligned physicians (difference-in-differences P = .03).

CONCLUSION

PSA testing and prostate biopsy rates decreased significantly between 2011 and 2014. The rate of PSA testing was not differentially affected by ACO participation. Conversely, there was an increase in the rate of prostate biopsy among patients of ACO-aligned physicians. ACOs did not accelerate deimplementation of PSA testing for eligible Medicare beneficiaries without prostate cancer.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy is a safe and effective procedure for patients with bladder cancer compared to laparoscopic and open surgery: Perioperative outcomes of a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

We compared the perioperative outcomes of patients with bladder cancer according to three different procedures: robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy (RALC), laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC), and open radical cystectomy (ORC).

METHODS

From April 2008 to March 2017, 36 consecutive patients underwent radical cystectomy and ileal conduit with RALC (n = 10), LRC (n = 10), or ORC (n = 16). All patients underwent RALC and LRC with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Perioperative data were patient demographics, perioperative laboratory data including hematocrit and creatinine, intraoperative crystalloids and colloids, estimated blood loss (EBL), allogeneic transfusion, respiratory parameters including maximum end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO₂) and respiratory rate, arterial blood gas data including highest pH, partial pressure of CO₂ (PaCO₂), partial pressure of oxygen (PaO₂), operative time, opiate consumption including intraoperative and postoperative anesthesia, time of hospital stay, time to oral intake and normal diet, and adverse events.

RESULTS

EBL was less for RALC than for other procedures (p = 0.0004). No blood transfusions were performed for RALC, but ORC required significant blood transfusions (p = 0.003). Respiratory rate was highest and PaCO₂ was lowest for RALC. Preoperative creatinine levels were significantly worse for the RALC group, but no significant differences were noted after surgery. There were no significant differences among the groups in regard to hematocrit levels. Operative time, laparoscopic time, intraoperative anesthesia, and postoperative anesthesia did not differ among the groups. High-grade adverse events were only seen for ORC.

CONCLUSION

Although RALC required a steep Trendelenburg position, which might add elements of risk, RALC was safe even for this small cohort.

Impact of a robotic surgical system on treatment choice for men with clinically organ-confined prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Introducing a new surgical technology may affect behaviors and attitudes of patients and surgeons about clinical practice. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) was approved in 2012 in Japan. We investigated whether the introduction of this system affected the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa) and the use of radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study on 718 patients with clinically determined organ-confined PCa treated at one of three Japanese academic institutions in 2011 (n = 338) or 2013 (n = 380). Two patient groups formed according to the treatment year were compared regarding the clinical characteristics of PCa, whether referred or screened at our hospital, comorbidities and surgical risk, and choice of primary treatment.

RESULTS

Distribution of PCa risk was not changed by the introduction of RALP. Use of RP increased by 70% (from 127 to 221 cases, p < 0.0001), whereas the number of those undergoing radiotherapy or androgen deprivation therapy decreased irrespective of the disease risk of PCa. Increased use of RP (from 34 to 100 cases) for intermediate- or high-risk PCa patients with mild perioperative risk (American Society of Anesthesiologists score 2) accounted for 70% of the total RP increase, whereas the number of low- or very low-risk PCa patients with high comorbidity scores (Charlson Index ≥ 4) increased from 8 to 25 cases, accounting for 18%. Use of expectant management (active surveillance, watchful waiting) in very low-risk PCa patients was 15% in 2011 and 12% in 2013 (p = 0.791).

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of a robotic surgical system had little effect on the risk distribution of PCa. Use of RP increased, apparently due to increased indications in patients who are candidates for RP but have mild perioperative risk. Although small, there was an increase in the number of RPs performed on patients with severe comorbidities but with low-risk or very low-risk PCa.

Impact of urologists' ownership of radiation equipment in the treatment of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Physician practices that offer ancillary medical services may refer their patients for such services, a process known as self-referral. We wanted to evaluate how utilization and cost of care differ for men diagnosed with prostate cancer in a self-referral practice (SRP) compared to a traditional urologic practice.

METHODS

A total of 17 982 men aged 66 years and older diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2006 to 2009 were identified from the Texas Cancer Registry. A total of 13 SRPs in the state of Texas were evaluated. We used multilevel logistic regression models that evaluated the odds of receiving a specific type of treatment.

RESULTS

Men diagnosed in SRPs were more likely to receive upfront treatment (vs watchful waiting/active surveillance) than men diagnosed by traditional practices (92.7% vs 89%; adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-2.00; P<0.001) and were more likely to be treated with external beam radiation (47.4% vs 34.1%; AOR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.84; P<0.001). This persisted for both favorable and unfavorable risk cancer. Median annual prostate cancer care cost was $2460 (95% CI $1663-$3368) higher for men diagnosed by SRPs. Limitations include data limited to men aged 65 years or older and geographic concentration of SRPs in Texas may not depict nationwide patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Older men diagnosed with prostate cancer in SRPs are more likely to undergo upfront treatment and to receive radiation treatment. This may increase appropriate treatment of unfavorable disease but contribute to overtreatment of favorable disease.

Urologist Practice Affiliation and Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer in the Elderly

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer treatment is a significant source of morbidity and spending. Some men with prostate cancer, particularly those with significant health problems, are unlikely to benefit from treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess relationships between financial incentives associated with urologist ownership of radiation facilities and treatment for prostate cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort of Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2012. Patients were further classified by their risk of dying from noncancer causes in the 10 yr following their cancer diagnosis by using a mortality model derived from comparable patients known to be cancer-free.

INTERVENTION

Urologists were categorized by their practice affiliation (single-specialty groups by size, multispecialty group) and ownership of a radiation facility.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS

Use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and use of any treatment within 1 yr of diagnosis. Generalized estimating equations were used to adjust for patient differences.

RESULTS

Among men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, use of IMRT ranged from 24% in multispecialty groups to 37% in large urology groups (p<0.001). Patients managed in groups with IMRT ownership (n=5133) were more likely to receive IMRT than those managed by single-specialty groups without ownership (43% vs 30%, p<0.001), regardless of group size. Among patients with a very high risk (> 75%) of noncancer mortality within 10 yr of diagnosis, both IMRT use (42% vs 26%, p<0.001) and overall treatment (53% vs 44%, p<0.001) were more likely in groups with ownership than in those without, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Urologists practicing in single-specialty groups with an ownership interest in radiation therapy are more likely to treat men with prostate cancer, including those with a high risk of noncancer mortality.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We assessed treatment for prostate cancer among urologists with varying levels of financial incentives favoring intervention. Those with stronger incentives, as determined by ownership interest in a radiation facility, were more likely to treat prostate cancer, even when treatment was unlikely to provide a survival benefit to the patient.

Decision-making processes among men with low-risk prostate cancer: A survey study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize decision-making processes and outcomes among men expressing early-treatment preferences for low-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We conducted telephone surveys of men newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer in 2012 to 2014. We analyzed subjects who had discussed prostate cancer treatment with a clinician and expressed a treatment preference. We asked about decision-making processes, including physician discussions, prostate-cancer knowledge, decision-making styles, treatment preference, and decisional conflict. We compared the responses across treatment groups with χ² or ANOVA.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 761) had a median age of 62; 82% were white, 45% had a college education, and 35% had no comorbidities. Surveys were conducted at a median of 25 days (range 9-100) post diagnosis. Overall, 55% preferred active surveillance (AS), 26% preferred surgery, and 19% preferred radiotherapy. Participants reported routinely considering surgery, radiotherapy, and AS. Most were aware of their low-risk status (97%) and the option for AS (96%). However, men preferring active treatment (AT) were often unaware of treatment complications, including sexual dysfunction (23%) and urinary complications (41%). Most men (63%) wanted to make their own decision after considering the doctor's opinion, and about 90% reported being sufficiently involved in the treatment discussion. Men preferring AS had slightly more uncertainty about their decisions than those preferring AT.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects were actively engaged in decision making and considered a range of treatments. However, we found knowledge gaps about treatment complications among those preferring AT and slightly more decisional uncertainty among those preferring AS, suggesting the need for early decision support.

Reimbursement and use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer

The use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer increased through the mid-2000s, in association with acquisition of the devices by large urology groups. More recently, reimbursement for IMRT in the office setting (generally representing freestanding facilities owned by physicians) has been declining. The aim of the study was to examine trends in IMRT use and related payments in the office versus hospital outpatient setting over time.In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 66,967 men aged 66 years or older, with newly diagnosed prostate cancer from 2007 through 2012 were identified in a 20% national sample of Medicare claims. IMRT use in the office versus hospital outpatient setting was examined over time, adjusted for patient characteristics using multivariable logistic regression models. Mean reimbursement for IMRT treatments and total IMRT-related payments were plotted by year.IMRT use increased from 28.6% to 38.0% of newly diagnosed men with prostate cancer over the study period, exclusively related to growth in the office setting. In particular, use in the office setting increased from 13.2% in 2007 to 22.1%, whereas use in the hospital outpatient setting remained essentially steady throughout the period around 15%. During the same period mean reimbursement for IMRT in the office setting declined from $504 per individual radiation treatment to $381, whereas it increased from $283 to $380 in the hospital outpatient setting. However, total IMRT-related payments in the office setting increased through 2011 due to increased utilization, falling only in 2012 (to $35.7 million from $48.3 million in 2011) related both to continued declines in reimbursement and a large reduction in new cases of prostate cancer.In conclusion, use of IMRT in the physician office setting in men diagnosed with prostate cancer has continued to increase in the face of declining reimbursement. Total payments for IMRT fell only in 2012, following a substantial reduction in new cases of prostate cancer.

Comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatments for patient-centered outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA Compliant)

BACKGROUND

In the context of prostate cancer (PCa) characterized by the multiple alternative treatment strategies, comparative effectiveness analysis is essential for informed decision-making. We analyzed the comparative effectiveness of PCa treatments through systematic review and meta-analysis with a focus on outcomes that matter most to newly diagnosed localized PCa patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of literature published in English from 1995 to October 2016. A search strategy was employed using terms "prostate cancer," "localized," "outcomes," "mortality," "health related quality of life," and "complications" to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective, and retrospective studies. For observational studies, only those adjusting for selection bias using propensity-score or instrumental-variables approaches were included. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratio was used to assess all-cause and disease-specific mortality. Funnel plots were used to assess the level of bias.

RESULTS

Our search strategy yielded 58 articles, of which 29 were RCTs, 6 were prospective studies, and 23 were retrospective studies. The studies provided moderate data for the patient-centered outcome of mortality. Radical prostatectomy demonstrated mortality benefit compared to watchful waiting (all-cause HR = 0.63 CI = 0.45, 0.87; disease-specific HR = 0.48 CI = 0.40, 0.58), and radiation therapy (all-cause HR = 0.65 CI = 0.57, 0.74; disease-specific HR = 0.51 CI = 0.40, 0.65). However, we had minimal comparative information about tradeoffs between and within treatment for other patient-centered outcomes in the short and long-term.

CONCLUSION

Lack of patient-centered outcomes in comparative effectiveness research in localized PCa is a major hurdle to informed and shared decision-making. More rigorous studies that can integrate patient-centered and intermediate outcomes in addition to mortality are needed.

The early adoption of intensity-modulated radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiation treatment among older Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Several new prostate cancer treatments have emerged since 2000, including 2 radiotherapies with similar efficacy at the time of their introduction: intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The objectives of this study were to compare their early adoption patterns and identify factors associated with their use.

METHODS

By using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, patients who received radiation therapy during the 5 years after IMRT introduction (2001-2005) and the 5 years after SBRT introduction (2007-2011) were identified. The outcome of interest was the receipt of new radiation therapy (ie, IMRT or SBRT) compared with the existing standard radiation therapies at that time. The authors fit a series of multivariable, hierarchical logistic regression models accounting for patients nested within health service areas to examine the factors associated with the receipt of new radiation therapy.

RESULTS

During 2001 to 2005, 5680 men (21%) received IMRT compared with standard radiation (n = 21,555). Men who received IMRT were older, had higher grade tumors, and lived in more populated areas (P < .05). During 2007 through 2011, 595 men (2%) received SBRT compared with standard radiation (n = 28,255). Men who received ng SBRT were more likely to be white, had lower grade tumors, lived in more populated areas, and were more likely to live in the Northeast (P < .05). Adjusting for cohort demographic and clinical factors, the early adoption rate for IMRT was substantially higher than that for SBRT (44% vs 4%; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a stark contrast in the adoption rates of IMRT and SBRT at the time of their introduction. Further investigation of the nonclinical factors associated with this difference is warranted. Cancer 2017;123:2945-54. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Acute and late complications after hypofractionated intensity modulated radiotherapy in prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The present study compared the complications associated with hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (Hypo-IMRT) of prostate cancer to conventionally fractionated IMRT (Conv-IMRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hypo-IMRT delivered 70 Gy in 28 fractions, whereas Conv-IMRT delivered 78 Gy in 39 fractions. Toxicity was graded with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, weekly during radiotherapy, 1 month after radiotherapy, and annually in both patient groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-ups were 39.1 and 38.7 months for patients in the Hypo- and Conv-IMRT groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in rates of acute and late adverse events. The proportions of grade 2 acute genitourinary complications were 48.4 and 51.2% in the Hypo- and Conv-IMRT groups, respectively. The presence of a baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of ten or more was the only significant prognostic factor for grade 2 acute genitourinary toxicity. The incidence of grade 2 late rectal hemorrhage at 3 years was 3.2 and 3.5% in the Hypo- and Conv-IMRT groups, respectively. Small rectal volume was significantly associated with grade 2 late rectal hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Regarding acute and late adverse events, hypofractionated IMRT for prostate cancer was well tolerated and comparable with conventionally fractionated IMRT. Clinical trial registration no. UMIN000003218.

Treatment of men with high-risk prostate cancer based on race, insurance coverage, and access to advanced technology

PURPOSE

We characterized factors related to nondefinitive management (NDM) of patients with high-risk prostate cancer and assessed impact from race, insurance status, and facility-level volume of technologically advanced prostate cancer treatments (i.e., intensity-modulated radiation therapy, robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy) on this outcome.

METHODS

We identified men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (based on D׳Amico criteria) in the National Cancer Database (2010-2012). Primary outcome was NDM (i.e., delayed/no treatment with prostatectomy/radiation therapy or androgen-deprivation monotherapy). Treating facilities were classified by quartiles of proportions of patients treated with advanced technology. Multivariable regression estimated odds of primary outcome based on race, insurance status, and facility-level technology use, and evaluated for interactions between these covariates.

RESULTS

Among 60,300 patients, 9,265 (15.4%) received NDM. This was more common among non-White men (P<0.001), Medicaid/uninsured patients (P<0.001), and those managed at facilities in the lowest quartile of technology use (25.1% vs. 11.0% highest, P<0.001). Though NDM was common among non-White men with Medicaid/no insurance treated at low-technology centers (43% vs. 10% White, private/Medicare, high-tech facility; adjusted odds ratios = 7.18, P<0.001), this was less likely if this group was managed at a high-tech hospital (22% vs. 43% low-tech, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology use at a facility correlates with high-quality prostate cancer care and is associated with diminished disparities based on insurance status and patient race. More research is required to characterize other facility-level factors explaining these findings.

Direct Administration of Nerve-Specific Contrast to Improve Nerve Sparing Radical Prostatectomy

Nerve damage remains a major morbidity following nerve sparing radical prostatectomy, significantly affecting quality of life post-surgery. Nerve-specific fluorescence guided surgery offers a potential solution by enhancing nerve visualization intraoperatively. However, the prostate is highly innervated and only the cavernous nerve structures require preservation to maintain continence and potency. Systemic administration of a nerve-specific fluorophore would lower nerve signal to background ratio (SBR) in vital nerve structures, making them difficult to distinguish from all nervous tissue in the pelvic region. A direct administration methodology to enable selective nerve highlighting for enhanced nerve SBR in a specific nerve structure has been developed herein. The direct administration methodology demonstrated equivalent nerve-specific contrast to systemic administration at optimal exposure times. However, the direct administration methodology provided a brighter fluorescent nerve signal, facilitating nerve-specific fluorescence imaging at video rate, which was not possible following systemic administration. Additionally, the direct administration methodology required a significantly lower fluorophore dose than systemic administration, that when scaled to a human dose falls within the microdosing range. Furthermore, a dual fluorophore tissue staining method was developed that alleviates fluorescence background signal from adipose tissue accumulation using a spectrally distinct adipose tissue specific fluorophore. These results validate the use of the direct administration methodology for specific nerve visualization with fluorescence image-guided surgery, which would improve vital nerve structure identification and visualization during nerve sparing radical prostatectomy.

Implications of evolving delivery system reforms for prostate cancer care

OBJECTIVES

Prostate cancer treatment is a significant source of morbidity and healthcare spending. Evolving clinical data have supported expanding surveillance as a means to "right-size" treatment. Integrated delivery systems afford the possibility of hastening this objective.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

We used a 20% sample of national Medicare claims to assess the impact of healthcare integration on rates of treatment and potential overtreatment in men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2007 and 2011. Rates were measured according to the extent of integration within a market (ie, none, low, intermediate, and high). Generalized estimating equations were used to assess the relationship between integration and utilization, adjusting for confounders.

RESULTS

Rates of treatment declined across all markets (P <.01 for overall time trend), but the rate of decline was similar for the 4 market types (P = .27). In the most integrated markets, the rate decreased by 28.8%, or from 55.5 per 10,000 population in 2007 to 39.5 per 10,000 in 2011. After adjusting for confounders, men residing in the most integrated markets were 2.1% less likely to be treated with curative intent compared with those living in areas without integrated delivery systems (P = .04). However, rates of potential overtreatment were similar across all markets regardless of the level of integration (P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare integration was associated with small declines in prostate cancer treatment in newly diagnosed men, but not with potential overtreatment. Integrated care alone may be insufficient to curtail potential overtreatment of prostate cancer.

Contemporary National Trends of Prostate Cancer Screening Among Privately Insured Men in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To assess the possible impact of changes to the clinical guidelines from the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations in 2012 on the national trends of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and identify patient characteristics associated with PSA screening from a large private insurance database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of men between 40 and 80 years of age who underwent PSA screening for prostate cancer from 2008 to 2013 in a population-based cohort of privately insured patients. Unadjusted and adjusted rates were calculated using member-years and reported per 1000 member-years.

RESULTS

Rates of PSA screening remained stable from 190.4 per 1000 member-years in 2008 to 196.4 in 2013 (P = .66). From 2008 to 2013, PSA screening did not change for patients aged 50-59 (236.5 to 241.1 per 1000 member-years; P = .78), 60-64 (284.1 to 288.3 per 1000 member-years; P = .77), 65-69 (250.6 to 248.0 per 1000 member-years; P = .56), and 70-74 (266.4 to 280.3 per 1000 member-years; P = .17). However, patients ≥75 years had marked decrease in the rate of PSA screening from 201.5 to 124.1 per 1000 member-years (P = .04). Across different racial groups, PSA screening rates remain unchanged over time irrespective of age.

CONCLUSION

Among this population-based cohort of privately insured men, we found little effect on PSA screening from changes to the US Preventive Services Task Force clinical practice guidelines. However, the rates of PSA screening were much lower among older men (>75 years). Further research is needed to assess the impact of the new guidelines on prostate cancer incidence and survival.

Using implementation science to improve urologic oncology care

There are many gaps between recommended urologic cancer care and real-world practice. Although we increasingly define these quality gaps because of our growing health services research capacity in urologic oncology, we often fall short in translating these findings into effective interventions and strategies to reduce gaps in care. In this article, we highlight implementation research as a logical next step for translating our health services research findings into effective individual and organizational behavior change strategies to improve quality of care. We explain how implementation research focuses on different, upstream outcomes from our clinical outcomes to get the right care to the right patient at the right time. Lastly, we share information about resources and training for those interested in learning more about this emerging, transdisciplinary field.

Association of functional status and treatment choice among older men with prostate cancer in the Medicare Advantage population

BACKGROUND

There are several effective treatments for prostate cancer. To what extent a patient's functional status influences the treatment decision is unknown. This study examined the association between functional status and treatment among older men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey data were used to identify men who were 65 years old or older and were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1998 and 2009. The primary outcome was treatment choice: conservative management, surgery, or radiation within 1 year of the diagnosis. The exposure was the functional status assessed as 4 measures within 3 domains: 1) physical function (activities of daily living [ADLs] and physical component summary score), 2) cognitive function (survey completer: self vs proxy), and 3) emotional well-being (mental component summary score). A multivariate, multinomial logistic regression was fitted with adjustments for several patient, tumor, and regional characteristics.

RESULTS

This study identified 508 conservative management patients, 195 surgery patients, and 603 radiation patients. Compared with men with no ADL dependency, those with any ADL dependency had lower odds of receiving surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.99) or radiation (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.78) versus conservative management. ADL dependency did not differ when surgery and radiation were compared. Patients with a proxy survey response were less likely to receive surgery or radiation versus conservative management.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional status is associated with treatment choice for men with prostate cancer. Future research should examine whether this is due to physician recommendations, patient preferences, or a combination. Cancer 2016;122:3199-206. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Treatment Preferences for Active Surveillance versus Active Treatment among Men with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Due to the concerns about the overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer, active surveillance (AS) is now a recommended alternative to the active treatments (AT) of surgery and radiotherapy. However, AS is not widely utilized, partially due to psychological and decision-making factors associated with treatment preferences.

METHODS

In a longitudinal cohort study, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1,140, 69.3% participation) with newly diagnosed, low-risk prostate cancer patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason ≤ 6) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We assessed psychological and decision-making variables, and treatment preference [AS, AT, and No Preference (NP)].

RESULTS

Men were 61.5 (SD, 7.3) years old, 24 days (median) after diagnosis, and 81.1% white. Treatment preferences were: 39.3% AS, 30.9% AT, and 29.7% NP. Multinomial logistic regression revealed that men preferring AS (vs. AT) were older (OR, 1.64; CI, 1.07-2.51), more educated (OR, 2.05; CI, 1.12-3.74), had greater prostate cancer knowledge (OR, 1.77; CI, 1.43-2.18) and greater awareness of having low-risk cancer (OR, 3.97; CI, 1.96-8.06), but also were less certain about their treatment preference (OR, 0.57; CI, 0.41-0.8), had greater prostate cancer anxiety (OR, 1.22; CI, 1.003-1.48), and preferred a shared treatment decision (OR, 2.34; CI, 1.37-3.99). Similarly, men preferring NP (vs. AT) were less certain about treatment preference, preferred a shared decision, and had greater knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a substantial proportion of men preferred AS, this was associated with anxiety and uncertainty, suggesting that this may be a difficult choice.

IMPACT

Increasing the appropriate use of AS for low-risk prostate cancer will require additional reassurance and information, and reaching men almost immediately after diagnosis while the decision-making is ongoing. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(8); 1240-50. ©2016 AACR.