Development and Validation of a Prostate Biopsy Risk Calculator in Black Men.

PURPOSE: We sought to develop and validate a prostate biopsy risk calculator for Black men and compare it with the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial version 2.0, Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group, and Kaiser Permanente Prostate Cancer Risk Calculators for the detection of Gleason Grade Group (GG) ≥ 2 prostate cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively recruited 2 cohorts of men undergoing prostate biopsy from 5 facilities in Chicago. The first cohort was split into development (70%) and internal validation (30%) groups. The second was used for external validation. Iterative logistic regression was used to develop 3 models for predicting GG ≥ 2 PCa. Models were compared for discrimination using the C statistics, calibration curves, and net benefit curves. The frequency of unnecessary biopsies and missed PCas was compared at 10% and 30% risk thresholds. RESULTS: The 2 cohorts included 393 and 292 Black men, respectively. Our first model, Mistry-Sun 1, used serum PSA and prior negative biopsy. Mistry-Sun 2 added abnormal digital rectal exam (DRE) and an interaction term with abnormal DRE and PSA to Mistry-Sun 1. Mistry-Sun 3 added prostate volume, abnormal DRE, and age to Mistry-Sun 1. The C statistics were 0.74, 0.74, and 0.78, respectively, and were similar to or higher than established calculators. At the 10% and 30% risk thresholds our models had the fewest unnecessary biopsies and an appropriate proportion of missed GG ≥ 2 PCas. CONCLUSIONS: Tailoring a risk calculator to detect clinically significant PCa in Black men may improve biopsy decision-making and outcomes compared to tools developed in non-Black populations.

Impact of genomic testing on urologists' treatment preference in favorable risk prostate cancer: A randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: The Oncotype Dx Genomic Prostate Score (GPS) is a 17-gene relative expression assay that predicts adverse pathology at prostatectomy. We conducted a novel randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of GPS on urologist's treatment preference for favorable risk prostate cancer (PCa): active surveillance versus active treatment (i.e., prostatectomy/radiation). This is a secondary endpoint from the ENACT trial which recruited from three Chicago hospitals from 2016 to 2019. METHODS: Ten urologists along with men with very low to favorable-intermediate risk PCa were included in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to standardized counseling with or without GPS assay. The main outcome was urologists' preference for active treatment at Visit 2 by study arm (GPS versus Control). Multivariable best-fit binary logistic regressions were constructed to identify factors independently associated with urologists' treatment preference. RESULTS: Two hundred men (70% Black) were randomly assigned to either the Control (96) or GPS arm (104). At Visit 2, urologists' preference for prostatectomy/radiation almost doubled in the GPS arm to 29.3% (29) compared to 14.1% (13) in the Control arm (p = 0.01). Randomization to the GPS arm, intermediate NCCN risk level, and lower patient health literacy were predictors for urologists' preference for active treatment. DISCUSSION: Limitations included sample size and number of urologists. In this study, we found that GPS testing reduced urologists' likelihood to prefer active surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate how obtaining prognostic biomarkers that predict negative outcomes before treatment decision-making might influence urologists' preference for recommending aggressive therapy in men eligible for active surveillance.

Engaging disparities in prostate cancer: Piloting an interactive, virtual workshop to educate providers on shared decision-making for underserved populations.

OBJECTIVE: Shared decision-making (SDM) is an approach to patient-centered care that is strongly recommended when counseling patients for screening and treatment of prostate cancer. However, providers report lack of comfort with SDM and particularly in disparate populations. We report our experience designing and piloting an online workshop to educate practicing urologists on SDM in diverse populations. Our objective was to create a valued interactive SDM workshop to help urologists learn to lead SDM discussions with men form underserved populations. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that urologists would agree or strongly agree that we met our learning objectives on postcourse survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With the support of the American Urologic Association, we developed a case-based workshop with interactive role-playing to demonstrate and teach integration of SDM into clinical care. Cases were centered around screening and treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer in diverse patients. Brief surveys were used to track success with learning objectives and urologists' satisfaction with the workshop. RESULTS: The session included 14 participants from 6 countries. A postworkshop survey indicated that 100% of respondents (8 of 8) "strongly agreed" that the activity met learning objectives, and 100% rated the session as "good" (1), "very good" (1), or "excellent" (6). Participants' knowledge also improved on shared decision-making concepts and the knowledge was maintained one month after the workshop. CONCLUSION: We successfully created and piloted an interactive online workshop to improve urologists' comfort using shared decision-making in caring for diverse patient populations. The course met its objectives and participant feedback for the course was positive. Sharing this process and framework for development of this intervention may inform future workshops that can be applied to medical students, residents, and providers.

Socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health care utilization in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Improving maternal and child health remains a public health priority in Ghana. Despite efforts made towards universal coverage, there are still challenges with access to and utilization of maternal health care. This study examined socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health care utilization related to pregnancy and identified factors that account for these inequalities. METHODS: We used data from three rounds of the Ghana Demographic and Health Surveys (2003, 2008 and 2014). Two health care utilization measures were used; (i) four or more antenatal care (ANC) visits and (ii) delivery by trained attendants (DTA). We first constructed the concentration curve (CC) and estimated concentration indices (CI) to examine the trend in inequality. Secondly, the CI was decomposed to estimate the contribution of various factors to inequality in these outcomes. RESULTS: The CCs show that utilization of at least four ANC visits and DTA were concentrated among women from wealthier households. However, the trends show the levels of inequality decreased in 2014. The CI of at least four ANC visits was 0.30 in 2003 and 0.18 in 2014. Similarly, the CIs for DTA was 0.60 in 2003 and 0.42 in 2014. The decomposition results show that access to National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) and women's education levels were the most important contributors to the reduction in inequality in maternal health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the importance of the NHIS and formal education in bridging the socioeconomic gap in maternal health care utilization.