Daniel J. Lee

Recent Changes in Prostate Cancer Screening Practices and Epidemiology

Purpose: Prostate specific antigen based screening for prostate cancer has had a significant impact on the epidemiology of the disease. Its use has been associated with a significant decrease in prostate cancer mortality but has also resulted in the over diagnosis and overtreatment of indolent prostate cancer, exposing many men to the harms of treatment without benefit. The USPSTF (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) in 2008 issued a recommendation against screening men older than 75 years, and in 2012 against routine screening for all men, indicating that in its interpretation the harms of screening outweigh the benefits. We review changes in the use of prostate specific antigen testing, performance of prostate biopsy, incidence of prostate cancer and stage of disease at presentation since 2012. Materials and Methods: An English language literature search was performed for terms that included “prostate specific antigen,” “screening” and “United States Preventive Services Task Force” in various combinations. A total of 26 original studies had been published on the effects of the USPSTF recommendations on prostate specific antigen based screening or prostate cancer incidence in the United States as of December 1, 2016. Results: Review of the literature from 2012 through the end of 2016 indicates that there has been a decrease in prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsy. As a result, there has been a decline in the incidence of localized prostate cancer, including low, intermediate and high risk disease. The data regarding stage at presentation have yet to mature but there are some early signs of a shift toward higher burden of disease at presentation. Conclusions: These findings raise concern about a reversal of the observed improvement in prostate cancer specific mortality during preceding decades. Alternative screening strategies would 1) incorporate patient preferences by allowing shared decision‐making, 2) preserve the survival benefits associated with screening, 3) improve the specificity of screening to reduce unnecessary biopsies and detection of low risk disease, and 4) promote the use of active surveillance for low risk cancers if they are detected.

Medicare Accountable Care Organization Enrollment and Appropriateness of Cancer Screening

Importance Despite rapid diffusion of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), whether ACO enrollment results in observable changes in cancer screening remains unknown. Objective To determine whether Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACO enrollment changes the appropriateness of screening for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants For this population-based analysis of Medicare beneficiaries, we used Medicare data from 2007 through 2014 and evaluated changes in screening associated with ACO enrollment using differences-in-differences (DD) analyses. We then performed difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) analyses to determine whether observed changes in cancer screening associated with ACO enrollment were different across strata of appropriateness, defined using age (65-74 years vs ≥75 years) and predicted survival (top vs bottom quartile). Main Outcomes and Measures Rates of breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening measured yearly as a proportion of eligible Medicare beneficiaries undergoing relevant screening services. Results Among Medicare beneficiaries, comprising 39 218 652 person-years before MSSP enrollment and 17 252 345 person-years after MSSP enrollment, breast cancer screening declined among both ACO (42.7% precontract, 38.1% postcontract) and non-ACO (37.3% precontract, 34.1% postcontract) populations. The adjusted rate of decline (DD) in the ACO population exceeded the non-ACO population by 0.79% (P < .001). This decline was most pronounced among elderly women (–2.1%), with minimal observed change among younger women (−0.26%). Baseline colorectal cancer screening rates were lower than those for breast cancer among both ACO (10.1% precontract, 10.3% postcontract) and non-ACO (9.2% precontract, 9.1% postcontract) populations. We observed an adjusted 0.24% (P = .03) increase in screening associated with ACO enrollment, most pronounced among younger Medicare beneficiaries (0.36%). For breast and colorectal cancer, we observed statistically significant differences in estimates of effect between age strata, suggesting that the ACO effect on cancer screening is mediated by age (DDD for both P < .001). Prostate cancer screening declined among ACO (35.1% precontract, 28.5% postcontract) and non-ACO (31.2% precontract, 25.7% postcontract) populations. The adjusted rate of decline in the ACO population exceeded that of the non-ACO population by 1.2%. We observed no difference in estimate of effect between age strata, suggesting that the ACO-mediated changes in prostate cancer screening are similar among younger and elderly men. Results characterizing appropriateness with predicted survival mirrored those when stratified by age. Conclusions and Relevance Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO enrollment is associated with more appropriate breast and colorectal screening, although the magnitude of the observed ACO effect is modest in the early ACO experience.

The Role and Importance of Timely Radical Cystectomy for High-Risk Non-muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer accounts for the majority of incident bladder cancers but is a heterogeneous disease with variation in clinical presentation, course, and outcomes. Risk stratification techniques have attempted to identify those at highest risk of cancer recurrence and progression to help personalize and individualize treatment options. Radical cystectomy during the optimal window of curability could improve cancer outcomes; however, identifying the disease and patient characteristics as well as the correct timing to intervene remains difficult. We review the natural history of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, discuss different risk-stratification techniques and how they can help identify those most likely to benefit from radical treatment, and examine the evidence supporting the benefit of timely cystectomy.

Racial variation in receipt of quality radiation therapy for prostate cancer

PurposeRacial disparities are apparent in the management and outcomes for prostate cancer; however, disparities in compliance to quality measures for radiation therapy for prostate cancer have not been previously studied. Therefore, the goal of the study was to characterize disparities in the compliance rates with quality measures.MethodsThe comparative effectiveness analysis of radiation therapy and surgery study is a population-based, prospective cohort study that enrolled 3708 men with clinically localized prostate cancer from 2011 to 2012. Compliance with 5 radiation-specific quality measures endorsed by national consortia as of 2011 was assessed, and compliance was compared by race using logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 604 men received definitive external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) of which 20% were self-reported black, 74% non-Hispanic white, and 6% Hispanic. Less than two-thirds of black and Hispanic men received EBRT that was compliant with all available quality measures (p = 0.012). Compared to white men, black men were less likely to receive dose-escalated EBRT (95% vs. 87%, p = 0.011) and less likely to avoid unnecessary pelvic radiation for low-risk disease (99% vs. 20%, p < 0.001). Compared to white men, Hispanic men were less likely to undergo image guidance (87% vs. 71%, p = 0.04). Black and Hispanic men were more likely to receive EBRT from low-quality providers than white men.ConclusionsAddressing disparities in access to providers that meet quality guidelines, and improving adherence to evidence-based processes of care may decrease racial/ethnic disparities in prostate cancer outcomes.

The Effect of Nerve Sparing Status on Sexual and Urinary Function: 3-Year Results from the CEASAR Study

Purpose: Nerve sparing contributes to the recovery of sexual and urinary function after radical prostatectomy but it may be ineffective in some patients or carry the risk of a positive surgical margin. We evaluated sexual and urinary function outcomes according to the degree of nerve sparing in patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: The CEASAR (Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation) study is a prospective, population based, observational study of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer in 2011 to 2012. Patient reported sexual and urinary functions were measured using the 26‐item Expanded Prostate Index Composite at baseline within 6 months after diagnosis, and 6, 12 and 36 months after enrollment. Study inclusion criteria included radical prostatectomy as primary treatment, documentation of nerve sparing status and absent androgen deprivation therapy. Nerve sparing status was defined as none, unilateral or bilateral according to the operative report. Results: The final analytical cohort included 991 men. The 11 men treated with unilateral nerve sparing and the 75 treated with a nonnerve sparing procedure were grouped together. In the multivariable model there was a significant difference in the sexual function score 3 years after radical prostatectomy in the bilateral nerve sparing group compared with the unilateral and nonnerve sparing group (6.1 points, 95% CI 2.0–10.3, p = 0.004). This was more pronounced in men with high baseline sexual function (8.23 points, 95% CI 1.6–14.8, p = 0.014) but not in those with low baseline function (4.0 points, 95% CI –0.6–8.7, p = 0.090). Similar effects were demonstrated on urinary incontinence scores. Conclusions: Bilateral nerve sparing resulted in better sexual and urinary function outcomes than unilateral or nonnerve sparing but the difference was not significant in men with low baseline sexual function.