Mahal Brandon A, Cooperberg Matthew R, Aizer Ayal A, Ziehr David R, Hyatt Andrew S, Choueiri Toni K, Hu Jim C, Sweeney Christopher J, Beard Clair J, D'Amico Anthony V, Martin Neil E, Orio Peter F, Trinh Quoc-Dien, Nguyen Paul L
Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass.
Departments of Urology and Epidemiology and Public Health, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, Calif.
Am J Med. 2015 Jun;128(6):609-16. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.12.030. Epub 2015 Jan 30.
The long-term prostate cancer-specific survival for patients initially managed with active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer ranges from 97% to 100%. We characterized factors that are associated with aggressive treatment with radical prostatectomy or radiation for indolent prostate cancer (defined as screening-detected, low-risk disease).
The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program was used to extract a cohort of 39,803 men diagnosed with prostate-specific antigen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer (clinical category T1c, Gleason score ≤6, and prostate-specific antigen <10) from 2004 to 2010. After socioeconomic profiles were generated from county-linked education and income data, multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether there were any factors associated with high rates of aggressive treatment.
The rate of aggressive treatment among all men with indolent prostate cancer was 64.3%. Greater rates of aggressive treatment were experienced by men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men (P < .001 for all cases). The increased adjusted odds for receipt of aggressive therapy were 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-1.32; P < .001), 1.26 (95% CI, 1.21-1.32; P < .001), and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.80-1.97; P < .001) for men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men, respectively, compared with men with low socioeconomic status, non-Caucasian men, and unmarried men, respectively.
Although men with high socioeconomic status, Caucasian men, and married men often receive the highest quality health care and have the best outcomes for many cancers, it seems that they are most at risk for the avoidable potential harms of aggressive treatment of indolent prostate cancer. Future policy should encourage more stringent guidelines for deferred treatment and culturally and sociodemographically competent counseling of active surveillance.
最初采用主动监测管理的低风险前列腺癌患者的长期前列腺癌特异性生存率在97%至100%之间。我们对与惰性前列腺癌(定义为筛查发现的低风险疾病)采用前列腺癌根治术或放疗进行积极治疗相关的因素进行了特征分析。
利用监测、流行病学和最终结果计划从2004年至2010年提取了一组39803名被诊断为前列腺特异性抗原检测到的低风险前列腺癌(临床类别T1c、Gleason评分≤6且前列腺特异性抗原<10)的男性。从与县相关的教育和收入数据生成社会经济概况后,使用多变量逻辑回归来确定是否存在与积极治疗高比率相关的任何因素。
所有惰性前列腺癌男性的积极治疗率为64.3%。社会经济地位高的男性、白人男性和已婚男性的积极治疗率更高(所有情况P<.零零一)。与社会经济地位低的男性、非白人男性和未婚男性相比,社会经济地位高的男性、白人男性和已婚男性接受积极治疗的调整后优势比分别为1.25(95%置信区间[CI],1.17 - 1.32;P<.零零一)、1.26(95%CI,1.21 - 1.32;P<.零零一)和1.88(95%CI,1.80 - 1.97;P<.零零一)。
虽然社会经济地位高的男性、白人男性和已婚男性通常能获得最高质量的医疗保健,并且在许多癌症中预后最佳,但似乎他们在惰性前列腺癌积极治疗的可避免潜在危害方面风险最大。未来的政策应鼓励制定更严格的延迟治疗指南,以及在文化和社会人口统计学方面具备胜任能力的主动监测咨询。