Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE In the absence of high-level evidence or clinical guidelines supporting any given active treatment approach over another for localized prostate cancer, clinician and patient preferences may lead to substantial variation in treatment use. METHODS Data were analyzed from 36 clinical sites that contributed data to the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry. Distribution of primary treatment use was measured over time. Prostate cancer risk was assessed using the D'Amico risk groups and the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score. Descriptive analyses were performed, and a hierarchical model was constructed that controlled for year of diagnosis, cancer risk variables, and other patient factors to estimate the proportion of variation in primary treatment selection explicable by practice site. Results Among 11,892 men analyzed, 6.8% elected surveillance, 49.9% prostatectomy, 11.6% external-beam radiation, 13.3% brachytherapy, 4.0% cryoablation, and 14.4% androgen deprivation monotherapy. Prostate cancer risk drives treatment selection, but the data suggest both overtreatment of low-risk disease and undertreatment of high-risk disease. The former trend appears to be improving over time, while the latter is worsening. Treatment varies with age, comorbidity, and socioeconomic status. However, treatment patterns vary markedly across clinical sites, and this variation is not explained by case-mix variability or known patient factors. Practice site explains a proportion of this variation ranging from 13% for androgen deprivation monotherapy to 74% for cryoablation. CONCLUSION Substantial variation exists in management of localized prostate cancer that is not explained by measurable factors. A critical need exists for high-quality comparative effectiveness research in localized prostate cancer to help guide treatment decision making.

[1]  L. Tanoue Cancer Statistics, 2009 , 2010 .

[2]  J. Crook,et al.  Impact of a multi-disciplinary patient education session on accrual to a difficult clinical trial: the Toronto experience with the surgical prostatectomy versus interstitial radiation intervention trial. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  Risk assessment for prostate cancer metastasis and mortality at the time of diagnosis. , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[4]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  The contemporary management of prostate cancer in the United States: lessons from the cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor (CapSURE), a national disease registry. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[5]  John T. Wei,et al.  Incidence of initial local therapy among men with lower-risk prostate cancer in the United States. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  A. D'Amico,et al.  Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[7]  P. Carroll,et al.  Comorbidity and primary treatment for localized prostate cancer: data from CaPSURE. , 2006, The Journal of urology.

[8]  Amitabh Chandra,et al.  Who you are and where you live: how race and geography affect the treatment of medicare beneficiaries. , 2004, Health affairs.

[9]  John T. Wei,et al.  Comprehensive comparison of health-related quality of life after contemporary therapies for localized prostate cancer. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  M. Wolf,et al.  Patient preferences in prostate cancer: a clinician's guide to understanding health utilities. , 2005, Clinical prostate cancer.

[11]  L. Holmberg,et al.  Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial. , 2008, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[12]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Dirk F Moore,et al.  Outcomes of localized prostate cancer following conservative management. , 2009, JAMA.

[14]  J. Pow-Sang,et al.  Treatment decision‐making strategies and influences in patients with localized prostate carcinoma , 2005, Cancer.

[15]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer Statistics, 2009 , 2009, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[16]  T. Wilt,et al.  The Prostate cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial:VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy to watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer. , 2009, Contemporary clinical trials.

[17]  T. Peters,et al.  Development of a complex intervention improved randomization and informed consent in a randomized controlled trial. , 2009, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

[18]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  National practice patterns and time trends in androgen ablation for localized prostate cancer. , 2003, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  T. Wilt,et al.  Systematic Review: Comparative Effectiveness and Harms of Treatments for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[20]  S Larry Goldenberg,et al.  Quality of life, sexual function and decisional regret at 1 year after surgical treatment for localized prostate cancer , 2007, BJU international.

[21]  M. Cooperberg,et al.  High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990–2007 , 2008, World Journal of Urology.

[22]  D. Lubeck,et al.  The CaPSURE database: a methodology for clinical practice and research in prostate cancer. CaPSURE Research Panel. Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor. , 1996, Urology.

[23]  Ann Barry Flood,et al.  Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: shared decision making using patient decision aids. , 2004, Health affairs.

[24]  J. Goodwin,et al.  Determinants of androgen deprivation therapy use for prostate cancer: role of the urologist. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.