Isolating the Drivers of Racial Inequities in Prostate Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Black individuals in the United States are less likely than White individuals to receive curative therapies despite a 2-fold higher risk of prostate cancer death. While research has described treatment inequities, few studies have investigated underlying causes. METHODS: We analyzed a cohort of 40,137 Medicare beneficiaries (66 and older) linked to the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry who had clinically significant, non-metastatic (cT1-4N0M0, grade group 2-5) prostate cancer (diagnosed 2010-2015). Using the Kitagawa-Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, we assessed the contributions of patient health and health care delivery on the racial difference in localized prostate cancer treatments (radical prostatectomy or radiation). Patient health consisted of comorbid diagnoses, tumor characteristics, SEER site, diagnosis year, and age. Health care delivery was captured as a prediction model with these health variables as predictors of treatment, reflecting current treatment patterns. RESULTS: A total of 72.1% and 78.6% of Black and White patients received definitive treatment, respectively, a difference of 6.5 percentage points. An estimated 15% [95% confidence interval (CI): 6-24] of this treatment difference was explained by measured differences in patient health, leaving the remaining estimated 85% (95% CI: 74-94) attributable to a potentially broad range of health care delivery factors. Limitations included insufficient data to explore how specific health care delivery factors, including structural racism and social determinants, impact differential treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show the inadequacy of patient health differences as an explanation of the treatment inequity. IMPACT: Investing in studies and interventions that support equitable health care delivery for Black individuals with prostate cancer will contribute to improved outcomes.

Racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality: a model-based decomposition of contributing factors.

To investigate the relative contributions of natural history and clinical interventions to racial disparities in prostate cancer mortality in the United States, we extended a model that was previously calibrated to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) incidence rates for the general population and for Black men. The extended model integrated SEER data on curative treatment frequencies and cancer-specific survival. Starting with the model for all men, we replaced up to 9 components with corresponding components for Black men, projecting age-standardized mortality rates for ages 40-84 years at each step. Based on projections in 2019, the increased frequency of developing disease, more aggressive tumor features, and worse cancer-specific survival in Black men diagnosed at local-regional and distant stages explained 38%, 34%, 22%, and 8% of the modeled disparity in mortality. Our results point to intensified screening and improved care in Black men as priority areas to achieve greater equity.

Inequities in Definitive Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer Among Those With Clinically Significant Mental Health Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with mental health disorders are at risk for receiving inequitable cancer treatment, likely resulting from various structural, social, and health-related factors. This study aims to assess the relationship between mental health disorders and the use of definitive treatment in a population-based cohort of those with localized, clinically significant prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study analysis in SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)-Medicare (2004-2015). History of a mental health disorder was defined as presence of specific ICD (International Classification of Diseases)-9 or ICD-10 diagnostic codes in the 2 years preceding cancer diagnosis. Descriptive statistics were performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and χ2 testing. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between mental health disorders and definitive treatment utilization (defined as surgery or radiation). RESULTS: Of 101,042 individuals with prostate cancer, 7,945 (7.8%) had a diagnosis of a mental health disorder. They were more likely to be unpartnered, have a lower socioeconomic status, and less likely to receive definitive treatment (61.8% vs 68.2%, P < .001). Definitive treatment rates were >66%, 62.8%, 60.3%, 58.2%, 54.3%, and 48.1% for post-traumatic stress disorder, depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, substance abuse disorder, and schizophrenia, respectively. After adjusting for age, race and ethnicity, marital status and socioeconomic status, history of a mental health disorder was associated with decreased odds of receiving definitive treatment (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with mental health disorders and prostate cancer represent a vulnerable population; careful attention to clinical and social needs is required to support appropriate use of beneficial treatments.

Disparities in prostate cancer.

Despite substantial advances in early detection/prevention and treatments, and improved outcomes in recent decades, prostate cancer continues to disproportionately affect Black men and is the secondleading cause of cancer death in this subgroup. Black men are substantially more likely to develop prostate cancer and are twice as likely to die from the disease compared with White men. In addition, Black men are younger at diagnosis and face a higher risk of aggressive disease relative to White men. Striking racial disparities endure along the continuum of prostate cancer care, including screening, genomic testing, diagnostic procedures, and treatment modalities. The underlying causes of these inequalities are complex and multifactorial and involve biological factors, structural determinants of equity (i.e., public policy, structural and systemic racism, economic policy), social determinants of health (including income, education, and insurance status, neighborhood/physical environment, community/social context, and geography), and health care factors. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial disparities in prostate cancer and to propose actionable recommendations to help address these inequities and narrow the racial gap.

Racial inequities in the quality of surgical care among Medicare beneficiaries with localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: US Black men are twice as likely to die from prostate cancer as men of other races. Lower quality care may contribute to this higher death rate. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained for men in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer (cT1-4N0/xM0/x) and managed primarily by radical prostatectomy (2005-2015). Surgical volume was determined for facility and surgeon. Relationships between race, surgeon and/or facility volume, and characteristics of treating facility with survival (all-cause and cancer-specific) were assessed using multivariable Cox regression and competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Black men represented 6.7% (n = 2123) of 31,478 cohort. They were younger at diagnosis, had longer time from diagnosis to surgery, lower socioeconomic status, higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and higher comorbid status compared with men of other races (p < .001). They were less likely to receive care from a surgeon or facility in the top volume percentile (p < .001); less likely to receive surgical care at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center and more likely seen at a minority-serving hospital; and less likely to travel ≥50 miles for surgical care. On multivariable analysis stratified by surgical volume, Black men receiving care from a surgeon or facility with lower volumes demonstrated increased risk of prostate cancer mortality (hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-2.69) adjusting for age, clinical stage, PSA, and comorbidity index. CONCLUSIONS: Black Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer more commonly receive care from surgeons and facilities with lower volumes, likely affecting surgical quality and outcomes. Access to high-quality prostate cancer care may reduce racial inequities in disease outcomes, even among insured men. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Black men are twice as likely to die of prostate cancer than other US men. Lower quality care may contribute to higher rates of prostate cancer death. We used surgical volume to evaluate the relationship between race and quality of care. Black Medicare beneficiaries with prostate cancer more commonly received care from surgeons and facilities with lower volumes, correlating with a higher risk of prostate cancer death and indicating scarce resources for care. Access to high-quality prostate cancer care eases disparities in disease outcomes. Patient-centered interventions that increase access to high-quality care for Black men with prostate cancer are needed.

Deconstructing, Addressing, and Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Prostate Cancer Care.

CONTEXT: Men of African ancestry have demonstrated markedly higher rates of prostate cancer mortality than men of other races and ethnicities around the world. In fact, the highest rates of prostate cancer mortality worldwide are found in the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan West Africa, and among men of African descent in the USA. Addressing this inequity in prostate cancer care and outcomes requires a focused research approach that creates durable solutions to address the structural, social, environmental, and health factors that create racial disparities in care and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To introduce a conceptual model for evaluating racial inequities in prostate cancer care to facilitate the development of translational research studies and interventions. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A collaborative review of literature relevant to racial inequities in prostate cancer care and outcomes was performed. Existing literature was used to highlight various components of the conceptual model to inform future research and interventions toward equitable care and outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Racial inequities in prostate cancer outcomes are driven by a series of structural and social determinants of health that impact exposures, mediators, and outcomes. Social determinants of equity, such as laws/policies, economic systems, and structural racism, affect the inequitable access to environmental and neighborhood exposures, in addition to health care access. Although the incidence disparity remains problematic, various studies have demonstrated parity in outcomes when social and health factors, such as access to equitable care, are normalized. Few studies have tested interventions to reduce inequities in prostate cancer among Black men. CONCLUSIONS: Worldwide, men of African ancestry demonstrate worse outcomes in prostate cancer, a phenomenon driven largely by social factors that inform biologic, environmental, and health care risks. A conceptual model was presented that organizes the many factors that influence prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Within that framework, we must understand the current state of inequities in clinical prostate cancer practice, the optimal state of what equitable practice would be, and how achieving equity in prostate cancer care balances costs, benefits, and harms. More robust characterization of the sources of prostate cancer inequities should inform testing of ambitious and innovative interventions as we work toward equity in care and outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Men of African ancestry demonstrate the highest rates of prostate cancer mortality, which may be reduced through social interventions. We present a framework for formalizing the identification of the drivers of prostate cancer inequities to facilitate the development of interventions and trials to eradicate them.

Social and Clinical Correlates of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Medicare Beneficiaries With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer From 2004-2015.

OBJECTIVE: To assess social and clinical correlates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) utilization among Medicare beneficiaries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of SEER-Medicare (2004-2015) patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated by radical cystectomy were stratified into 3-groups: standard of care NAC (cisplatin-based combination), non-standard of care NAC, and upfront cystectomy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess social, demographic and clinical correlates of each treatment category. Survival analyses were performed to compare propensity matched treatment groups. RESULTS: In total, 6214 patients were identified with a median follow-up of 21 [IQR 7-54] months. NAC utilization increased from 10.7% to 39.1%, between 2004 and 2015, largely due to increased use of standard of care regimens. The most commonly used nonstandard regimen was gemcitabine/carboplatin (50.2%). Older age, Hispanic and Black race, lower socioeconomic status, and contraindications to cisplatin were associated with increased odds of receiving nonstandard of care NAC compared to standard of care. Standard of care NAC was associated with improved overall survival HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.76, 0.94) and HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.63, 0.89) compared to both upfront cystectomy and nonstandard of care NAC, respectively. CONCLUSION: NAC utilization has increased to nearly 40%; however, the use of non-standard of care NAC regimen have persisted (~8%). Cisplatin-ineligibility, older age, race/ethnicity, and lower socioeconomic status were correlated with nonstandard of care NAC, which provided no clinical benefit at the risk of potential harm. In accordance with current clinical guidelines, cisplatin-ineligible patients should be considered for timely upfront cystectomy or novel clinical trials.

Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Survival in Micropapillary Urothelial Carcinoma: Data From a Tertiary Referral Center and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program.

BACKGROUND: Micropapillary urothelial carcinoma (MPC) is a rare urothelial carcinoma variant with conflicting data guiding clinical practice. In this study, we explored oncologic outcomes in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in a retrospective cohort of patients with MPC, alongside data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with MPC or conventional urothelial carcinoma (CUC) without any variant histology undergoing radical cystectomy (RC) in our institution (2003-2018). SEER-Medicare was also queried to identify patients diagnosed with MPC (2004-2015). Clinicopathologic data and treatment modalities were extracted. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon and chi-square tests were used for comparative analysis and Cox regression for identifying clinical covariates associated with OS. RESULTS: Our institutional database yielded 46 patients with MPC and 457 with CUC. In SEER-Medicare, 183 patients with MPC were identified, and 63 (34%) underwent RC. In the institutional cohort, patients with MPC had significantly higher incidence of cN+ (17% vs. 8%), pN+ stage (30% vs. 17%), carcinoma-in-situ (43% vs. 25%), and lymphovascular invasion (30% vs. 16%) at RC versus those with CUC (all P < .05). Pathologic complete response (ypT0N0) to NAC was 33% for MPC and 35% for CUC (P = .899). Median OS was lower for institutional MPC versus CUC in univariate analysis (43.6 vs. 105.3 months, P = .006); however, MPC was not independently associated with OS in the multivariate model. Median OS was 25 months in the SEER MPC cohort for patients undergoing RC, while NAC was not associated with improved OS in that group. CONCLUSION: Pathologic response to NAC was not significantly different between MPC and CUC, while MPC histology was not an independent predictor of OS. Further studies are needed to better understand biological mechanisms behind its aggressive features as well as the role of NAC in this histology variant.

A Contemporary Analysis of Outcomes and Modifiable Risk Factors of Ethnic Disparities in Kidney Transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide a contemporary analysis of longitudinal kidney transplant outcomes and to evaluate potential causes of ethnic disparities among African American (AA) and Caucasian American (CA) patients undergoing kidney transplantation at our institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 1400 patients were identified who underwent kidney transplantation from 2003 to 2013 from a large, academic institution in Cleveland, OH. Relevant recipient and donor demographic and clinical covariates were obtained from an institutional transplant database. Simple descriptive statistics and comparative survival analyses were performed to assess overall survival and graft survival. RESULTS: The final cohort was comprised of 341 AA and 1059 CA patients. AAs were less likely to receive a living donor transplant (27.6% vs. 57.2%, p < 0.001) compared to CAs. Overall patient survival did not significantly differ between the two groups even when stratified by ethnicity. However, AAs had a significantly lower rate of graft survival (p < 0.001). On stratified analysis, there was no difference in the rate of graft survival among AAs and CAs who received living donor grafts. On univariate analysis, AAs demonstrated higher rates of immunosuppression non-compliance and chronic rejection (both p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, AA recipient ethnicity (HR 1.56, p = 0.047), recipient history of diabetes (HR 1.67, p < 0.001), and AA donor ethnicity (HR 1.56, p = 0.047) were significantly associated with graft failure. CONCLUSION: AAs undergoing deceased donor renal transplantation demonstrated lower graft survival compared to CAs. Conversely, this disparity did not exist among AAs undergoing living donor transplantation. AAs had higher rates of deceased donor transplantation, immunosuppression non-compliance, chronic rejection, and diabetes. Opportunities exist to use patient education, alternative immunosuppression regimens, and living transplantation to close the ethnic disparity in renal allograft survival.

Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Modified 1-Layer versus Formal 2-Layer Vasovasostomy Technique.

PURPOSE: Approximately 2% to 6% of men undergoing vasectomy will ultimately have it reversed. Cost is a major consideration for patients and providers with regard to vasovasostomy. Opportunities for cost savings for vasectomy reversal lie in the reduction of variable costs, namely operative time and materials used. In this study we determine the cost benefits of a modified 1-layer vasovasostomy compared to a formal 2-layer vasovasostomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of a single surgeon experience of vasectomy reversals performed from 2010 to 2015. The cohort consisted of men who underwent bilateral vasovasostomy using a formal 2-layer or modified 1-layer technique. The primary end points of the analysis were total operative time; number, cost and type of suture used; and patency/postoperative semen analysis. Bivariate analysis was performed for these continuous variables using the Wilcoxon rank test and the chi-square test was used for categorical variables. RESULTS: Of the 106 men who underwent bilateral vasovasostomy 81.1% (86) had a formal and 18.9% (20) had a modified 1-layer repair. The modified 1-layer closure resulted in a significantly shorter operative time, lower microsuture cost and lower overall operative cost compared to formal repair (all p <0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in semen parameters between the 2 techniques at the first postoperative visit. CONCLUSIONS: The modified 1-layer vasovasostomy resulted in shorter operative times and lower costs compared to formal repair without compromising postoperative patency. In this era of cost containment the modified repair provides the opportunity to perform vasectomy reversal at a lower cost to patients and providers.