Racial and Ethnic Differences in Prostate Cancer Survivors' Perceived Engagement in Treatment Decision-Making

The impact of ethnicity on decisions and decision making in prostate cancer: an integrative review

OBJECTIVES

There are various factors that influence men's treatment decision-making for prostate cancer. However, the evidence has not been synthesized by ethnicity. The aim of this integrative review is to identify studies exploring men's decision-making treatment choices for prostate cancer by ethnicity.

DESIGN

Literature was sought from the British Nursing Database, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PubMed. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies that concerned men from any ethnic background and had received a diagnosis of prostate cancer and treatment decision-making was discussed. 12 papers were included in this review.

RESULTS

The results showed that a combination of external and internal influences affected men's treatment decision-making based on ethnicity. Men from certain ethnic backgrounds opted for certain types of treatment over others depending on their personal contexts which was further divided amongst age, education, and language spoken. Generally, White men were more likely to opt for surgery, with Black and Hispanic men less likely to undergo surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this review, White and Black men stated that their doctors' recommendation was a factor in their treatment decision-making for prostate cancer; however, other men reported that their doctors were less helpful with language representing a barrier. Further UK studies are required.

Differences in the treatment patterns of small renal masses: A disaggregated analyses by race/ethnicity

OBJECTIVE

To characterize differences in the management of small renal masses among disaggregated race/ethnic subgroups.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with clinically localized kidney cancer and tumor size ≤4cm. We studied 16 predefined racial/ethnic subgroups and compared 1) the use of surveillance for tumors <2cm and 2) the use of radical nephrectomy for tumors ≤4cm. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the independent association of race/ethnicity with management, adjusting for baseline characteristics. We also compared our disaggregated analyses to the 6 National Institute of Health aggregate race categories.

RESULTS

We identified 286,063 patients that met inclusion criteria. For tumors <2cm, Black Non-Hispanic (aOR 1.43) and Mexican patients (aOR 1.29) were significantly more likely to undergo surveillance compared to White patients. For tumors ≤4cm, Black Non-Hispanic (aOR 1.43), Filipino (aOR 1.28), Japanese (aOR 1.28), Mexican (aOR 1.32), and Native Indian patients (aOR 1.15) were significantly more likely to undergo radical nephrectomy compared to White patients. When comparing our disaggregated analyses to the NIH categories, we found that many disaggregated race/ethnic subgroups had associations with management strategies that were not represented by their aggregated group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we found that the use of surveillance for tumors <2cm and radical nephrectomy for tumors ≤4cm varied significantly among certain race/ethnic subgroups. Our disaggregated approach provides information on differences in treatment patterns in particular subgroups that warrant further study to optimize kidney cancer care for all patients.

Disparities Associated with Shared Decision-making in Prostate Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer screening guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. However, it is unclear who undergoes SDM and whether any disparities exist.

OBJECTIVE

To examine sociodemographic differences in participation of SDM and its association with PSA testing in prostate cancer screening.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among men aged 45-75 yr undergoing PSA screening, using the 2018 National Health Interview Survey database. The evaluated sociodemographic features included age, race, marital status, sexual orientation, smoking status, working status, financial difficulty, US geographic regions, and cancer history. Questions regarding self-reported PSA testing and whether respondents discussed its advantages and disadvantages with their healthcare provider were analyzed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Our primary outcome was to evaluate the possible associations between various sociodemographic factors and undergoing PSA screening and SDM. We used multivariable logistic regression analyses to detect potential associations.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 59596 men were identified, of whom 5605 answered the question regarding PSA testing, with 2288 (40.6%) undergoing PSA testing. Of these men, 39.5% (n = 2226) discussed the advantages and 25.6% (n = 1434) discussed the disadvantages of PSA testing. On a multivariable analysis, older (odds ratio [OR] 1.092; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.081-1.103, p < 0.001) and married (OR 1.488; 95% CI 1.287-1.720, p < 0.001) men were more likely to undergo PSA testing. Although Black men were more likely to discuss PSA advantages (OR 1.421; 95% CI 1.150-1.756, p = 0.001) and disadvantages (OR 1.554; 95% CI 1.240-1.947, p < 0.001) than White men, this did not correlate with higher rates of PSA screening (OR 1.086; 95% CI 0.865-1.364, p = 0.477). The lack of important clinical data remains a limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, SDM rates were low. Older and married men had an increased likelihood of SDM and PSA testing. Despite higher rates of SDM, Black men had similar rates of PSA testing to White men.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated sociodemographic differences in shared decision-making (SDM) in prostate cancer screening using a large national database. We found that SDM had varying results in different sociodemographic groups.

Experience with the US health care system for Black and White patients with advanced prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess differences in reported information about treatment, integration into care, and respect by self-identified Black and White individuals with advanced prostate cancer in the United States.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of 701 participants (20% identifying as Black) enrolled in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer at 37 US sites from 2017 to 2022. Participants were asked six questions from the Cancer Australia National Cancer Control Indicators about their experience with care at study enrollment. Prevalence differences by self-reported race were estimated using marginal standardization of logistic-normal mixed effects models (adjusted for age at enrollment and disease state at enrollment), and 95% CIs were estimated using parametric bootstrapping.

RESULTS

Most participants reported a high quality of care for each question. Black participants generally reported higher care quality compared with White participants. Black participants reported more frequently that they were offered a written assessment and care plan (71%) compared with White participants (58%; adjusted difference, 13 percentage points; 95% CI, 4-23). Black participants also reported more frequently being given the name of nonphysician personnel who would support them (64%) than White participants (52%; adjusted difference, 10; 95% CI, 1-20). Prevalence differences did not differ by disease state at enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

Black participants generally reported a higher quality of care compared with White participants. This study calls attention to the need to study potential mediating factors and interpersonal aspects of care in this population to improve survivorship.

Navigating Intercultural Medical Encounters: An Examination of Patient-Centered Communication Practices with Italian and Foreign Cancer Patients Living in Italy

Effective communication is crucial in cancer care due to the sensitive nature of the information and the psychosocial impact on patients and their families. Patient-centered communication (PCC) is the gold standard for providing quality cancer care, as it improves patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, clinical outcomes, and overall quality of life. However, doctor-patient communication can be complicated by ethnic, linguistic, and cultural differences. This study employed the ONCode coding system to investigate PCC practices in oncological visits (doctor's communicative behavior, patient's initiatives, misalignments, interruptions, accountability, and expressions of trust in participants' talk, Markers of uncertainty in doctor's talk, markers of emotions in doctor's talk). Forty-two video-recorded patient-oncologist encounters (with 22 Italian and 20 foreign patients), including both first and follow-up visits, were analyzed. Three discriminant analyses were conducted to assess differences in PCC between patient groups (Italian or foreign patients) according to the type of encounter (first visit or follow-up) and the presence or absence of companions during the encounters. Multiple regression analyses were performed to evaluate the PCC differences by oncologist age, patient age, and patient sex, controlling for the type of encounter, the presence of a companion during the visit, and patient group on ONCode dimensions. No differences were found in PCC by patient group in discriminant analyses and regressions. Doctor communication behavior, interruptions, accountability, and expressions of trust were higher in first visits than in follow-ups. The disparities in PCC were primarily linked to the type of visit and the age of the oncologist. However, a qualitative analysis showed notable differences in the types of interruptions during visits with foreign patients compared to Italian patients. It is essential to minimize interruptions during intercultural encounters to foster a more respectful and conducive environment for patients. Furthermore, even when foreign patients demonstrate sufficient linguistic competence, healthcare providers should not solely rely on this factor to ensure effective communication and quality care.

Factors that influence treatment decisions: A qualitative study of racially and ethnically diverse patients with low- and very-low risk prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Factors that influence prostate cancer treatment decisions are complex, multifaceted, and personal, and may vary by race/ethnicity. Although research has been published to quantify factors involved in decision-making, these studies have been limited to primarily white, and to a lesser extent, Black patients, and quantitative studies are limited for discerning the cultural and contextual processes that shape decision-making.

METHODS

We conducted 43 semi-structured interviews with a racially and ethnically diverse sample of patients diagnosed with low- and very-low risk prostate cancer who had undergone treatment for their prostate cancer. Interviews were transcribed, independently coded, and analyzed to identify themes salient for decision-making, with attention to sociocultural differences.

RESULTS

We found racial and ethnic differences in three areas. First, we found differences in how socialized masculinity influenced patient's feelings about different treatment options. Second, we found that for some men, religion and spirituality alleviated anxiety associated with the active surveillance protocol. Finally, for racially and ethnically minoritized patients, we found descriptions of how historic and social experiences within the healthcare system influenced decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study adds to the current literature by expounding on racial and ethnic differences in the multidimensional, nuanced factors related to decision-making. Our findings suggest that factors associated with prostate cancer decision-making can manifest differently across racial and ethnic groups, and provide some guidance for future research.

Decision-making support among racial and ethnic minorities diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer: A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To describe the types of decision-making support interventions offered to racial and ethnic minority adults diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer and to draw any associations between these interventions and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted literature searches in five bibliographic databases. Studies were screened through independent review and assessed for quality. Results were analyzed using inductive qualitative methods to determine thematic commonalities and synthesized in narrative form.

RESULTS

Searches across five databases yielded 2496 records, which were screened by title/abstract and full-text to identify 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria. The use of decision aids (DAs), trained personnel, delivery models and frameworks, and educational materials were notable decision-making support interventions. Analysis revealed six thematic areas: 1) Personalized reports; 2) Effective communication; 3) Involvement in decision-making; 4) Health literacy; 5) Social support; and 6) Feasibility in clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests decision-making support interventions are associated with positive outcomes of racial and ethnic minorities with patient-reported factors like improved patient engagement, less decisional regret, higher satisfaction, improved communication, awareness of health literacy and cultural competence.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future decision-making interventions for racial and ethnic minority cancer patients should focus on social determinants of health, social support systems, and clinical outcomes like QoL and survival.

Prostate cancer patients' self-reported participation in research: an examination of racial/ethnic disparities

PURPOSE

We examined prostate cancer patients' participation in research and associated factors by race/ethnicity in a multiethnic sample.

METHODS

Men with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer were identified through the California Cancer Registry. Patients completed a cross-sectional telephone interview in English, Spanish, Cantonese or Mandarin. Multivariable logistic regression models, stratified by race/ethnicity, estimated the associations of patient demographic and health characteristics with participation in (1) any research, (2) behavioral research, and (3) biological/clinical research.

RESULTS

We included 855 prostate cancer patients: African American (19%), Asian American (15%), Latino (24%), and White (42%). In the overall model of participation in any research, African American men (Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.54, 95% CI 1.63-3.94), and those with two or more comorbidities (OR = 2.20, 95% CI 1.27-3.80) were more likely to report participation. Men 65 years old and older (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.91), those who were married or living with a partner (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98), and those who completed the interview in Spanish (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.85) were less likely to report participating in any research. Stratified analyses identified racial/ethnic-specific sociodemographic characteristics associated with lower research participation, including Spanish or Chinese language, older age, and lower education.

CONCLUSION

African American prostate cancer patients reported higher research participation than all other groups. However, recruitment efforts are still needed to overcome barriers to participation for Spanish and Chinese speakers, and barriers among older adults and those with lower education levels.

Improving Shared Decision Making in Latino Men With Prostate Cancer: A Thematic Analysis

Background. Multiple studies have shown that digitally mediated decision aids help prepare patients for medical decision making with their providers. However, few studies have investigated whether decision-support preferences differ between non-English-speaking and English-speaking Latino men with limited literacy. Objective. To identify and compare health information seeking patterns, preferences for information presentation, and interest in digital decision aids in a sample of Southern Californian underserved Latino men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer at a county hospital. Methods. We conducted semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews with 12 Spanish-speaking and 8 English-speaking Latino men using a purposive sampling technique. Following transcription of taped interviews, Spanish interviews were translated. Using a coding protocol developed by the team, two bilingual members jointly analyzed the transcripts for emerging themes. Coder agreement exceeded 80%. Differences were resolved through discussion. Results. Thematic differences between groups with different preferred languages emerged. Most respondents engaged in online health information seeking using cellphones, perceived a paternalistic patient-provider relationship, and expressed willingness to use hypothetical digital decision aids if recommended by their provider. English speakers reported higher digital technology proficiency for health-related searches. They also more frequently indicated family involvement in digital search related to their condition and preferred self-guided, web-based decision aids. In comparison, Spanish speakers reported lower digital technology proficiency and preferred family-involved, coach-guided, paper and visual decision aids. English speakers reported substantially higher levels of formal education. Conclusion. Preferences regarding the use of digital technology to inform prostate cancer treatment decision making among underserved Latino men varied depending on preferred primary language. Effective preparation of underserved Latino men for shared decision making requires consideration of alternative approaches depending on level of education attainment and preferred primary language.

Understanding shared decision-making experience among vulnerable population: Focus group with food bank clients

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a critical component of delivering patient-centered care. Members of vulnerable populations may play a passive role in clinical decision-making; therefore, understanding their prior decision-making experiences is a key step to engaging them in SDM.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the previous healthcare experiences and current expectations of vulnerable populations on clinical decision-making regarding therapeutic options.

METHODS

Clients of a local food bank were recruited to participate in focus groups. Participants were asked to share prior health decision experiences, explain difficulties they faced when making a therapeutic decision, describe features of previous satisfactory decision-making processes, share factors under consideration when choosing between treatment options, and suggest tools that would help them to communicate with healthcare providers. We used the inductive content analysis to interpret data gathered from the focus groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-six food bank clients participated in four focus groups. All participants lived in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage. Four themes emerged: prior negative clinical decision-making experience with providers, patients preparing to engage in SDM, challenges encountered during the decision-making process, and patients' expectations of decision aids. Participants also reported they were unable to discuss therapeutic options at the time of decision-making. They also expressed financial concerns and the need for sufficiently detailed information to evaluate risks.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest the necessity of developing decision aids that would improve the engagement of vulnerable populations in the SDM process, including consideration of affordability, use of patient-friendly language, and incorporation of drug-drug and drug-food interactions information.

Shared decision making, satisfaction with care and medication adherence among patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVES

We examined factors associated with shared decision making and whether shared decision-making (SDM) was associated with satisfaction with care or with adherence to anti-diabetic medication.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted using 2011-2014 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data. Inclusion criteria were 18 years or older and visit to a usual source of care during the prior 12 months. Exclusion criteria were reported cognitive limitation, proxy response, less than two prescription fills, or missing data on study variables. SDM was assessed using seven MEPS items. Satisfaction with care was assessed using a single MEPS item 12 months after SDM measurement. Adherence was assessed using Medication Possession Ratio in 12 months after SDM measurement.

RESULTS

The weighted sample of 797 respondents represented 15.6 million with diabetes. Being older, male, or uninsured were associated with low SDM. High SDM was associated with higher satisfaction (p < 0.0001). SDM was not associated with adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with higher SDM were more satisfied with their healthcare. We did not find association between SDM and adherence to antidiabetic medication.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Involvement in SDM is encouraged to improve patient satisfaction. Providers may consider age, sex and insurance status in facilitating communications to improve SDM.