Association of household net worth with healthcare costs after radical cystectomy using real-world data.

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity of bladder cancer care may influence how patients utilize healthcare resources, from emergency department (ED) encounters to office visits. We aim to examine whether greater household net worth (HHNW) confers differential access to healthcare resources after radical cystectomy (RC). METHODS: This population-based cohort study examined the association between HHNW and healthcare utilization costs in the 90 days post-RC in commercially insured patients with bladder cancer. Costs accrued from the index hospitalization to 90 days after including health plan costs (HPC) and out-of-pocket costs (OPC). Multivariable logistic regression models were generated by encounter (acute inpatient, ED, outpatient, and office visit). RESULTS: A total of 141,903 patients were identified with HHNW categories near evenly distributed. Acute inpatient encounters incurred the greatest HPC and OPC. Office visits conferred the lowest HPC while ED visits had the lowest OPC. Black patients harbored increased odds of an acute inpatient encounter (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.16-1.29) and ED encounter (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.14-1.27) while Asian (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.85) and Hispanic (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.78, p < 0.001) patients had lower odds of an outpatient encounter, compared to White counterpart. Increasing HHNW was associated with decreasing odds of acute inpatient or ED encounters and greater odds of office visits. CONCLUSIONS: Lower HHNW conferred greater risk of costly inpatient encounters while greater HHNW had greater odds of less costly office visits, illustrating how financial flexibility fosters differences in healthcare utilization and lower costs. HHNW may serve as a proxy for financial flexibility and risk of financial hardship than income alone.

The Future State of Race/Ethnicity in Urology: Urology Workforce Projection From 2021-2061.

OBJECTIVE: To project the proportion of the urology workforce that is from under-represented in medicine (URiM) groups between 2021-2061. METHODS: Demographic data were obtained from AUA Census and ACGME Data Resource Books. The number of graduating urology residents and proportion of URiM graduating residents were characterized with linear models. Stock and Flow models were used to project future population numbers and proportions of URiM practicing urologists, contingent on assumptions regarding trainee demographics, retirement trends, and growth in the field. RESULTS: Currently, there is an increase in the percentage of URiM graduates by 0.145% per year. If historical trends continue, URiM urologists will likely comprise 16.2% of urology residency graduates and 13.3% of the practicing urological workforce in 2061. These percentages would constitute an underrepresentation of URiM urologists relative to the projected 44.2% of the U.S. population who would identify as American Indian/Alaskan Native, Black/African American, Latinx/Hispanic and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander by 2060.1 An increase in the percentage of URiM graduates by 0.845% per year would result in 44.2% URiM urology residency graduates and 26.1% URiM practicing urologists by 2061. An interactive app was designed to allow for a range of assumptions to be explored and for future data to be incorporated. CONCLUSION: URiM physician representation within urology over the next 40years will remain disproportionately low compared to that of the projected share of people of color in the general U.S. POPULATION: In order to achieve the AUA's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion goals, a concerted effort to implement interventions to recruit, train, and retain a generation of racially diverse urologists appears necessary.

Association between sociodemographic factors and diagnosis of lethal prostate cancer in early life.

OBJECTIVE: A subset of patients are diagnosed with lethal prostate cancer (CaP) early in life before prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening is typically initiated. To identify opportunities for improved detection, we evaluated patient sociodemographic factors associated with advanced vs. localized (CaP) diagnosis across the age spectrum. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database, identifying patients diagnosed with CaP from 2004 to 2020. We compared characteristics of patients diagnosed at the advanced (cN1 or M1) versus localized (cT1-4N0M0) stage. Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated the associations among patient clinical and sociodemographic factors and advanced diagnosis, stratifying patients by age as ≤55 (before screening is recommended for most patients), 56 to 65, 66 to 75, and ≥76 years. RESULTS: We identified 977,722 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at diagnosis was 65.3 years and 50,663 (5.1%) had advanced disease. Overall, uninsured (OR = 3.20, 95% CI 3.03-3.78) and Medicaid-insured (OR 2.58, 95% CI 2.48-2.69) vs. privately insured status was associated with higher odds of diagnosis with advanced disease and this effect was more pronounced for younger patients. Among patients ≤55 years, uninsured (OR 4.14, 95% CI 3.69-4.65) and Medicaid-insured (OR 3.39, 95% CI 3.10-3.72) vs. privately insured patients were associated with higher odds of advanced cancer at diagnosis. Similarly, residence in the lowest vs. highest income quartile was associated with increased odds of advanced CaP in patients ≤55 years (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.30). Black vs. White race was associated with increased odds of advanced CaP at diagnosis later in life (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.25); however, race was not significantly associated with advanced stage CaP in those ≤55 years (P = 0.635). CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic disparities in diagnosis at advanced stages of CaP were more pronounced in younger patients, particularly with respect to insurance status. These findings may support greater attention to differential use of early CaP screening based on patient health insurance.

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.

Presurgical 68Ga-PSMA-11 Positron Emission Tomography for Biochemical Recurrence Risk Assessment: A Follow-up Analysis of a Multicenter Prospective Phase 3 Imaging Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the initial staging of patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa), prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) has been established as a front-line imaging modality. The increasing number of PSMA-PET scans performed in the primary staging setting might be associated with decreases in biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival (BCR-FS). OBJECTIVE: To assess the added prognostic value of presurgical PSMA-PET for BCR-FS compared with the presurgical Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) and postsurgical CAPRA-Surgery (CAPRA-S) scores in patients with intermediate- to high-risk PCa treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) and pelvic lymph node dissection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a follow-up study of the surgical cohort evaluated in the multicenter prospective phase 3 imaging trial (n = 277; NCT03368547, NCT02611882, and NCT02919111). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Each 68Ga-PSMA-11-PET scan was read by three blinded independent readers. PSMA-PET prostate uptake (low vs high), PSMA-PET extraprostatic disease (N1/M1), and CAPRA and CAPRA-S scores were used to assess the risk of BCR. Patients were followed after RP by local investigators using electronic medical records. BCR was defined by a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level increasing to ≥0.2 ng/ml after RP or initiation of PCa-specific secondary treatment (>6 mo after surgery). Univariate and multivariable Cox models, and c-statistic index were performed to assess the prognostic value of PSMA-PET and for a comparison with the CAPRA and CAPRA-S scores. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: From December 2015 to December 2019, 277 patients underwent surgery after PSMA-PET. Clinical follow-up was obtained in 240/277 (87%) patients. The median follow-up after surgery was 32.4 (interquartile range 23.3-42.9) mo. Of 240 BCR events, 91 (38%) were observed. PSMA-PET N1/M1 was found in 41/240 (17%) patients. PSMA-PET prostate uptake, PSMA-PET N1/M1, and CAPRA and CAPRA-S scores were significant univariate predictors of BCR. The addition of PSMA-PET N1/M1 status to the presurgical CAPRA score improved the risk assessment for BCR significantly in comparison with the presurgical CAPRA score alone (c-statistic 0.70 [0.64-0.75] vs 0.63 [0.57-0.69]; p < 0.001). The C-index of the postsurgical model utilizing the postsurgical CAPRA-S score alone was not significantly different from the presurgical model combining the presurgical CAPRA score and PSMA-PET N1/M1 status (p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Presurgical PSMA-PET was a strong prognostic biomarker improving BCR-FS risk assessment. Its implementation in the presurgical risk assessment with the CAPRA score improved the performance and reduced the difference with the reference standard (postsurgical CAPRA-S score). PATIENT SUMMARY: The use prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography improved the assessment of biochemical recurrence risk in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer who were treated with radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.

Prostate cancer disparities among American Indians and Alaskan Natives in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Americans Indians and Alaska Natives face disparities in cancer care with lower rates of screening, limited treatment access, and worse survival. Prostate cancer treatment access and patterns of care remain unknown. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data to compare incidence, primary treatment, and cancer-specific mortality across American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian and Pacific Islander, Black, and White patients. Baseline characteristics included prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Gleason score (GS), tumor stage, 9-level Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment risk score, county characteristics, and health-care provider density. Primary outcomes were first definitive treatment and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). RESULTS: American Indian and Alaska Native patients were more frequently diagnosed with higher PSA, GS greater than or equal or 8, stage greater than or equal to cT3, high-risk disease overall (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment risk score ≥ 6), and metastases at diagnosis than any other group. Adjusting for age, PSA, GS, and clinical stage, American Indian or Alaska Native patients with localized prostate cancer were more likely to undergo external beam radiation than radical prostatectomy and had the highest rates of no documented treatment. Five-year PCSM was higher among American Indian and Alaska Natives than any other racial group. However, after multivariable adjustment accounting for clinical and pathologic factors, county-level demographics, and provider density, American Indian and Alaska Native patient PCSM hazards were no different than those of White patients. CONCLUSIONS: American Indian or Alaska Native patients have more advanced prostate cancer, lower rates of definitive treatment, higher mortality, and reside in areas of less specialty care. Disparities in access appear to account for excess risks of PCSM. Focused health policy interventions are needed to address these disparities.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Medical Student Timing and Perceived Quality of Exposure to Urology.

OBJECTIVE: To contextualize the low representation of Under-Represented in Medicine (URiM) in urology, we examine differences in timing and perceived quality of urology clinical and research exposures for medical students across race/ethnicity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to all medical students at University of California, Los Angeles. Dependent variables were timing of urology exposure and perceived quality of urology exposure. Descriptive statistics and multivariate analyses were used to compare variables across race/ethnicity. Logistic regression was used to determine odds of early exposure to urology across race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Black and Latinx students were significantly less likely to discover urology before MS3 (P <.001). Although URiM students were more likely to recall receiving a urology interest group invitation (Asian 46%, Black 53%, Latinx 67%, White 48%, P = .03), they were less likely to attend an event (Asian 23%, Black 4%, Latinx 3% and White 15%, P <.001) despite being more likely to be interested in urology (Asian 32%, Black 38%, Latinx 50%, White 28%, P = .01). Black students were more likely to gain exposure via family/friend with a urological diagnosis. Black and Latinx students were twice as dissatisfied with timing and method of medical school exposure to urology versus their peers. There were differences across race/ethnicity for whether or not a student had engaged in urology research (Asian 10%, Black 5%, Latinx 2%, White 2%, P = .01). CONCLUSION: Racial/ethnic disparities exist in early exposure to urology, involvement in urology interest group, access to research, and satisfaction with exposure to urology. Interventions addressing the timing and quality of urology exposures may optimize recruitment of URiM students into urology.

Mediators of Racial Disparity in the Use of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Among Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Racial disparity in the use of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) presents obstacles to closing gaps in prostate cancer diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. Objective: To identify clinical, sociodemographic, and structural processes underlying racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI among men with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used mediation analysis to assess claims in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database for prostate MRI among 39 534 patients with a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015. Statistical analysis was performed from April 1, 2020, to September 1, 2021. Exposure: Diagnosis of prostate cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Claims for prostate MRI within 6 months before or after diagnosis of prostate cancer were assessed. Candidate clinical and sociodemographic meditators were identified based on their association with both race and prostate MRI, including the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), as specified to measure racialized residential segregation. Mediation analysis was performed using nonlinear multiple additive regression trees models to estimate the direct and indirect effects of mediators. Results: A total of 39 534 eligible male patients (3979 Black patients [10.1%] and 32 585 White patients [82.4%]; mean [SD] age, 72.8 [5.3] years) were identified. Black patients with prostate cancer were less likely than White patients to receive a prostate MRI (6.3% vs 9.9%; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.62, 95% CI, 0.54-0.70). Approximately 24% (95% CI, 14%-32%) of the racial disparity in prostate MRI use between Black and White patients was attributable to geographic differences (SEER registry), 19% (95% CI, 11%-28%) was attributable to neighborhood-level socioeconomic status (residence in a high-poverty area), 19% (95% CI, 10%-29%) was attributable to racialized residential segregation (ICE quintile), and 11% (95% CI, 7%-16%) was attributable to a marker of individual-level socioeconomic status (dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid). Clinical and pathologic factors were not significant mediators. In this model, the identified mediators accounted for 81% (95% CI, 64%-98%) of the observed racial disparity in prostate MRI use between Black and White patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this this population-based cohort study of US adults, mediation analysis revealed that sociodemographic factors and manifestations of structural racism, including poverty and residential segregation, explained most of the racial disparity in the use of prostate MRI among older Black and White men with prostate cancer. These findings can be applied to develop targeted strategies to improve cancer care equity.

Disparities in fertility knowledge among women from low and high resource settings presenting for fertility care in two United States metropolitan centers.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined health literacy and fertility knowledge among women from low income, socio-culturally diverse communities presenting for fertility care in the United States. Our study sought to examine demographic predictors of fertility-related knowledge among infertile women from low and high-resource communities in two major metropolitan centers in the United States. METHODS: Fertility Knowledge Assessments were administered to women presenting for fertility care at county medical centers serving low-resource, largely immigrant patients and to women from largely affluent populations presenting to comprehensive fertility centers in two cities. The influence of demographic predictors on fertility knowledge was examined through regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 143 women were included in our analysis. In the county hospital/low resource clinic (LR, n = 70), the mean age was 32.8 ± 6.1 years vs 35.0 ± 5.0 years in the fee-for-service/high resource clinic (HR, n = 73). Among the LR patients, 74% were immigrants, 71% had an annual income <$25,000 and 52% had completed high school. Among HR patients, 36% were immigrants, 60% had an annual income >$100,000, and 95% had some college or above. On average, women from HR settings scored 3.0 points higher on the Fertility Knowledge Assessment than their LR counterparts (p < 0.001). Upon multivariate analysis, education level remained the sole independent factor associated with fertility knowledge assessment score (p < 0.001). Stratifying by resource level revealed that income was highly associated with fertility knowledge (p < 0.01) among high resource individuals even when adjusting for education level. CONCLUSIONS: Women from low resource, largely immigrant communities, seeking fertility care have greater disparities in fertility knowledge and lower health literacy compared to women from high resource clinical settings. Further studies are needed to understand these barriers and to develop targeted inventions to lower disparities and improve care for these vulnerable populations.

Whom to Treat: Postdiagnostic Risk Assessment with Gleason Score, Risk Models, and Genomic Classifier.

Management of prostate cancer presents unique challenges because of the disease's variable natural history. Accurate risk stratification at the time of diagnosis in clinically localized disease is crucial in providing optimal counseling about management options. To accurately distinguish pathologically indolent tumors from aggressive disease, risk groups are no longer sufficient. Rather, multivariable prognostic models reflecting the complete information known at time of diagnosis offer improved accuracy and interpretability. After diagnosis, further testing with genomic assays or other biomarkers improves risk classification. These postdiagnostic risk assessment tools should not supplant shared decision making, but rather facilitate risk classification and enable more individualized care.

Out-of-pocket fertility patient expense: data from a multicenter prospective infertility cohort.

PURPOSE: The high costs of fertility care may deter couples from seeking care. Urologists often are asked about the costs of these treatments. To our knowledge previous studies have not addressed the direct out-of-pocket costs to couples. We characterized these expenses in patients seeking fertility care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Couples were prospectively recruited from 8 community and academic reproductive endocrinology clinics. Each participating couple completed face-to-face or telephone interviews and cost diaries at study enrollment, and 4, 10 and 18 months of care. We determined overall out-of-pocket costs, in addition to relationships between out-of-pocket costs and treatment type, clinical outcomes and socioeconomic characteristics on multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 332 couples completed cost diaries and had data available on treatment and outcomes. Average age was 36.8 and 35.6 years in men and women, respectively. Of this cohort 19% received noncycle based therapy, 4% used ovulation induction medication only, 22% underwent intrauterine insemination and 55% underwent in vitro fertilization. The median overall out-of-pocket expense was $5,338 (IQR 1,197-19,840). Couples using medication only had the lowest median out-of-pocket expenses at $912 while those using in vitro fertilization had the highest at $19,234. After multivariate adjustment the out-of-pocket expense was not significantly associated with successful pregnancy. On multivariate analysis couples treated with in vitro fertilization spent an average of $15,435 more than those treated with intrauterine insemination. Couples spent about $6,955 for each additional in vitro fertilization cycle. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide real-world estimates of out-of-pocket costs, which can be used to help couples plan for expenses that they may incur with treatment.