Article

Patterns and correlates of prostate cancer treatment in older men.

Department of Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
The American journal of medicine (Impact Factor: 5.3). 03/2011; 124(3):235-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.10.016
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although elderly men, particularly patients with low-risk prostate cancer and a life expectancy less than 10 years, are unlikely to benefit from prostate cancer active therapy, treatment rates in this group are high.
By using the population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program linked to Medicare data from 2004 to 2005, we examined the effects of clinical and nonclinical factors on the selection of prostate cancer active therapy (ie, radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, brachytherapy, or androgen deprivation therapy) in men aged≥75 years with a new diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for receiving prostate cancer active therapy.
The majority of men aged≥75 years were treated with prostate cancer active therapy (81.7%), which varied by disease risk level: low, 72.2%; intermediate, 83.7%; and high, 86.4%. Overall, in older men, the percentage of the total variance in the use of prostate cancer active therapy attributable to clinical and nonclinical factors was minimal, 5.1% and 2.6%, respectively. In men with low-risk disease, comorbidity status did not affect treatment selection, such that patients with 1 or 2+ comorbidities were as likely to receive prostate cancer active therapy as healthy men: OR=0.98; 95% CI, 0.76-1.27 and OR=1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.68, respectively. Geographic location was the most powerful predictor of treatment selection (Northeast vs Greater California: OR=2.41; 95% CI, 1.75-3.32).
Clinical factors play a limited role in treatment selection among elderly patients with localized prostate cancer.

0 Followers
 · 
117 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Men with major comorbidities are at risk for overtreatment of prostate cancer due to uncertainty regarding their life expectancy. We sought to characterize life expectancy and treatment in a population-based cohort of men with differing ages and comorbidity burdens at diagnosis.METHODS We sampled 96,032 men aged ≥66 years with early-stage prostate cancer who had Gleason scores ≤7 and were diagnosed during 1991 to 2007 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database. We calculated cumulative incidence of other-cause mortality and determined treatment patterns among subgroups defined by age and Charlson comorbidity index scores.RESULTSOverall, life expectancy was <10 years (10-year other-cause mortality rate, >50%) for 50,049 of 96,032 men (52%). Life expectancy differed by age and comorbidity score and was <10 years for men ages 66 to 69 years with Charlson scores ≥2, for men ages 70 to 74 years with Charlson scores ≥1, and for all men ages 75 to 79 years and ≥80 years. Among those who had a life expectancy <10 years, treatment was aggressive (surgery, radiation, or brachytherapy) for 68% of men aged 66 to 69 years, 69% of men aged 70 to 74 years, 57% of men aged 75 to 79 years, and 24% of men aged ≥80 years. Among these men, aggressive treatment was predominantly radiation therapy (50%, 53%, 63%, and 69%, respectively) and less frequently was surgery (30%, 25%, 13%, and 9%, respectively). Multivariate models revealed little variation in the probability of aggressive treatment by comorbidity status within age subgroups despite substantial differences in mortality.CONCLUSIONS Men aged <80 years at diagnosis who have life expectancies <10 years often receive aggressive treatment for low-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, mostly with radiation therapy. [See related editorial on pages 000-000, this issue.] Cancer 2014. © 2014 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 12/2014; 120(23). DOI:10.1002/cncr.28926 · 4.90 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examined whether the survival advantage of androgen-deprivation therapy with radiotherapy (ADT plus RT) relative to ADT alone for men with locally advanced prostate cancer reported in two randomized trials holds in real-world clinical practice and extended the evidence to patients poorly represented in the trials. We conducted nonrandomized effectiveness studies of ADT plus RT versus ADT in three groups of patients diagnosed between 1995 and 2007 and observed through 2009 in the SEER-Medicare data set: (1) the randomized clinical trial (RCT) cohort, which included men age 65 to 75 years and was most consistent with participants in the randomized trials; (2) the elderly cohort, which included men age > 75 years with locally advanced prostate cancer; and (3) the screen-detected cohort, which included men age ≥ 65 years with screen-detected high-risk prostate cancer. We evaluated cause-specific and all-cause mortality using propensity score, instrumental variable (IV), and sensitivity analyses. In the RCT cohort, ADT plus RT was associated with reduced cause-specific and all-cause mortality relative to ADT alone (cause-specific propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.49; all-cause propensity score-adjusted HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.67). Effectiveness estimates for the RCT cohort were not significantly different from those from randomized trials (P > .1). In the elderly and screen-detected cohorts, ADT plus RT was also associated with reduced cause-specific and all-cause mortality. IV analyses produced estimates similar to those from propensity score-adjusted methods. Older men with locally advanced or screen-detected high-risk prostate cancer who receive ADT alone risk decrements in cause-specific and overall survival. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 01/2015; 33(7). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.57.2743 · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Geriatric oncology guidelines state that fit older men with prostate cancer should receive curative treatment. In a population-based study, we investigated associations between age and non-receipt of curative treatment in men with localised prostate cancer, and the effect of clinical variables on this in different age groups. Methods: Clinically localised prostate cancers (T1–T2N0M0) diagnosed from 2002 to 2008 among men aged ⩾40 years, with hospital in-patient episode(s) within 1 year post-diagnosis, were included (n=5456). Clinical and socio-demographic variables were obtained from cancer registrations. Comorbidity was determined from hospital episode data. Logistic regression was used to investigate associations between age and non-receipt of treatment, adjusting for confounders; the outcome was non-receipt of curative treatment (radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy). Results: The percentage who did not receive curative treatment was 9.2%, 14.3%, 48.2% and 91.7% for men aged 40–59, 60–69, 70–79 and 80+ years, respectively. After adjusting for clinical and socio-demographic factors, age remained the main determinant of treatment non-receipt. Men aged 70–79 had a significant five-fold increased risk of not having curative treatment compared with men aged 60–69 (odds ratio (OR)=5.5; 95% confidence interval 4.7, 6.5). In age-stratified analyses, clinical factors had a higher weight for men aged 60–69 than in other age strata. Over time, non-receipt of curative treatment increased among men aged 40–59 and decreased among men aged 70–79. Conclusion: Age remains the dominant factor in determining non-receipt of curative treatment. There have been some changes in clinical practice over time, but whether these will impact on prostate cancer mortality remains to be established.
    British Journal of Cancer 05/2013; 109(1). DOI:10.1038/bjc.2013.268 · 4.82 Impact Factor