Investigating the racial gap in prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen among younger men from 2012 to 2020

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging utilization and its relationship with advanced prostate cancer detection

BACKGROUND

The rise in advanced prostate cancer has coincided with increased use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), leading to the hypothesis that this increase in surveillance registries is an artifact of more sensitive imaging tools. We assessed the association between regional variation in prostate MRI and advanced prostate cancer diagnoses.

METHODS

We utilized SEER-Medicare data (2004-2015), including men > 65 diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. The predictor variable was the utilization of prostate MRI in each hospital referral region (HRR, representing regional healthcare markets). We compared the proportion of disease recorded as locally advanced or of regional risk group (cT3, cT4, and cN1) which would plausibly have been detected by prostate MRI. We conducted adjusted multivariable analysis and performed correlation analysis with Spearman rank coefficient at the level of the HRR. Sensitivity analysis for years 2011 to 2015 was conducted.

RESULTS

Of 98,921 men diagnosed, 4.01% had locally advanced or regional disease. The median prostate MRI utilization rate was 4.58% (IQR [3.03%, 8.12%]). Adjusted multivariable analysis revealed no statistically significant correlation between MRI utilization and proportion of advanced prostate cancer (aOR = 1.01, 95% CI, [0.99,1.03]) in each region. The correlation between MRI usage and advanced diagnosis was not significant (Spearman Ρ = 0.09, P = 0.4). Sensitivity analysis conducted between 2011 and 2015 showed similar results (aOR = 1.008, 95% CI, [0.989, 1.027]; Spearman Ρ = 0.16, P = 0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

During our study period, HRR-level utilization of MRI was not associated with higher incidences of advanced prostate cancer. This suggests the rising advanced prostate cancer diagnoses observed in this period are unlikely an artifact of greater sensitivity of modern imaging tests, but potentially due to other factors such as changes in screening or risk factors. With increased utilization and evolving techniques in recent years, the association between MRI and advanced prostate cancer detection warrants continued monitoring.

Identifying Barriers to Timely Follow-up After Elevated PSA Screening: A Retrospective Analysis of a Large Healthcare System

OBJECTIVE

To examine elevated PSA follow-up within our system and identify areas for improvement in the timely diagnosis of prostate cancer.

METHODS

We queried the Mass General Brigham's Enterprise Data Warehouse from 2018-2021, identifying patients with elevated PSA and documented time to follow-up. Timely follow-up was defined as having a urologist appointment, prostate biopsy, or prostate magnetic resonance imaging within 6 months from diagnosis. We stratified the location of elevated PSA diagnosis to academic medical centers versus community sites. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors impacting follow-up.

RESULTS

We included 28,346 patients, with 50.30%, 15.02%, and 34.69% receiving timely, untimely, and no follow-up during the study period, respectively. In multivariable analysis, patients seen at academic medical centers were more likely to receive follow-up care (OR=1.39, 95%CI 1.30-1.48). In a sensitivity analysis including 2 of our largest community hospitals as part of academic medical facilities, those following up at our main sites showed even higher odds of timely follow-up (OR=1.61, 95%CI 1.51-1.73).

CONCLUSION

Our study observed variations in follow-up rate between our academic medical centers and community sites. This finding highlights the need for efforts to improve consistency and timeliness of prostate cancer follow-up care across all facilities. By addressing interfacility disparities, we can facilitate the delivery of timely care to all patients.

Prostate-specific antigen testing rates in high-risk populations: results from the All of Us Research Program

BACKGROUND

Early detection of prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remains controversial and disparities in the receipt of prostate cancer screening persist in the US. We sought to examine disparities in PSA testing rates among groups with higher prostate cancer risk and differential access to healthcare.

METHODS

We identified a cohort of 37,706 males within the All of Us Research Program without a history of prostate cancer between the ages of 40 and 85 at time of enrollment (2017-2021). Incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the number of PSA tests received during follow-up through December 2021 were estimated using age- and multivariable-adjusted negative binomial regression models. PSA testing frequencies in the cohort were compared with population-based estimates from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

RESULTS

A total of 6,486 males (17.2%) received at least one PSA test over the course of follow-up. In multivariable-adjusted models, non-Hispanic Black males received PSA tests at a 17% lower rate (IRR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.76, 0.90) than non-Hispanic White males. Higher educational attainment, higher annual income, having self-/employer-purchased insurance, having a spouse or domestic partner, and having a family history of prostate cancer were all associated with higher rates of PSA testing. The proportion of males ages 55 to 69 who received a PSA test within two years was lower in All of Us (12.4%, 95% CI 11.8-13.0%) relative to population-based estimates from the BRFSS (35.2%, 95% CI 34.2-36.3%).

CONCLUSION

Absolute PSA testing rates in All of Us were lower than population-based estimates, but associations with PSA testing in the cohort mirrored previously reported disparities in prostate cancer screening. These findings highlight the importance of addressing barriers to care in order to reduce disparities in cancer screening.

Understanding and Addressing Prostate Cancer Disparities in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Outcomes Among Black Men

Despite advances in screening, diagnosis, and treatment for prostate cancer (PCa), Black men tend to be diagnosed at younger ages, have higher mortality rates, and are at increased risk of recurrence or metastasis compared to their White counterparts. PCa disparities among Black men are caused by a complex interaction of social, behavioral, and biological factors across the public policy, community, organizational, interpersonal, and individual levels. Key contributing factors include mistrust in the health care system, poor communication between patients and providers, low awareness of screening guidelines, and high medical costs. These disparities are further exacerbated by the low representation of Black men in clinical trials, which limits access to high-quality cancer care and generalizability for PCa treatments. In this narrative review of the existing literature, we examined the epidemiology and identified contributing factors, and propose multi-level strategies to address and mitigate disparities among Black men with PCa.

Incidence trends in prostate cancer among men in the United States from 2000 to 2020 by race and ethnicity, age and tumor stage

Purpose

To explore whether prostate cancer incidence trends from 2000 to 2020 in the United States differed by race and ethnicity, age and tumor stage; to explore racial differences in prostate cancer incidence change due to the impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in 2020; and to determine if there is any high-risk population that can be targeted for prevention.

Methods

We identified 1,098,349 men who were diagnosed with incident prostate cancer at age ≥20 in 2000-2020 in 17 registries of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program in the United States; of whom, 778,437 were non-Hispanic whites, 155,111 non-Hispanic blacks, 4,200 American Indians and Alaska Natives (AIAN), 55,267 non-Hispanic Asians/Pacific Islanders, and 105,334 Hispanics.

Results

Age-adjusted incidence rate of prostate cancer was the highest in blacks (302.6 cases per 100,000 men), followed by whites (186.6), Hispanics (153.2), AIAN (108.5), and Asians (104.9). Age-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates dramatically decreased from 2000 to 2013 for all ethnic men. However, age-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates increased from 2014 to 2020, in which the increasing incidence trend looked sharper in blacks and whites, flatter in Asians, and leveled in AIAN and Hispanics. Among men with local or regional stages across all years, prostate cancer incidence rate was significantly higher in blacks, but significantly lower in Hispanics, AIAN, and Asians as compared to whites. Among men in 2007-2013, the risk of distant stage prostate cancer was statistically significantly elevated in blacks (rate-ratio: 2.22, 95% CI: 2.06-2.38) and Hispanics (1.16, 1.06-1.25), not significantly different in AIAN (1.30, 0.92-1.76), but still significantly lower in Asians (0.73, 0.66-0.82) as compared to whites. There was a drop of prostate cancer incidence from 2019 to 2020 likely due to the impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on the access to medical care in 2020. Overall prostate cancer incidence rate decreased by 40.4 cases per 100,000 population from 277.4 in 2019 to 237.0 in 2020 for blacks, 20.9 from 164.2 to 143.3 for whites, 16.8 from 124.8 to 108.0 for Hispanics, 14.9 from 101.7 to 86.8 for AIAN, and 12.6 from 88.4 to 75.8 for Asians.

Conclusion

The decreasing trend of prostate cancer incidence from 2000 to 2013 was statistically significant for all ethnic men. There was an increasing prostate cancer incidence from 2014 to 2020. Age-adjusted incidence rate of prostate cancer was the highest in blacks, followed by whites, Hispanics, AIAN, and Asians, regardless of age groups, tumor stages, and time periods. There will also be a need to monitor and investigate the prostate cancer incidence trend during and after COVID-19 pandemic season.

The national utilization of nonoperative management for small renal masses over 10 years

BACKGROUND

Management of small renal masses often involves a nonoperative approach, but there is a paucity of information about the use and associated predictors of such approaches. This study aimed to determine the trends in and predictors of use of nonoperative management of small renal masses.

METHODS

Using data from the National Cancer Database for localized small renal masses (N0/M0, cT1a) diagnosed between 2010 and 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional study. Nonoperative management was defined as expectant management (active surveillance or watchful waiting) or focal ablation. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 156 734 patients included, 10.5% underwent expectant management, and 13.9% underwent focal ablation. Later year of diagnosis was associated with a higher likelihood of nonoperative management. In 2020, the odds of receiving expectant management and focal ablation were 90% (AOR = 1.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.71 to 2.11) and 44% (AOR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.31 to 1.57) higher, respectively, than in 2010. Black patients had increased odds of expectant management (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.39 to 1.55) but decreased odds of focal ablation (AOR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.88 to 0.99).

CONCLUSION

Over the decade, the use nonoperative management of small renal masses increased, with expectant management more frequently used than focal ablation among Black patients. Possible explanations include race-based differences in physicians' risk assessments and resource allocation. Adjusting for Black race in calculations for glomerular filtration rate could influence the differential uptake of these techniques through deflated glomerular filtration rate calculations. These findings highlight the need for research and policies to ensure equitable use of less invasive treatments in small renal masses.