Racial and ethnic differences in advanced-stage prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study.

BACKGROUND: African-Americans have twice the risk of non-Hispanic whites for presenting with advanced-stage prostate cancer. To investigate the reasons for this difference, we evaluated the association between race/ethnicity and advanced-stage prostate cancer, adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and pathologic factors. METHODS: A population-based cohort of 3173 men diagnosed with prostate cancer between October 1, 1994, and October 31, 1995, was analyzed. Medical record abstracts and self-administered survey questionnaires were used to obtain information regarding race/ethnicity, age, marital status, insurance status, educational level, household income, employment status, comorbidity, urinary function, prostate-specific antigen level, tumor grade, and clinical stage. The odds ratio (OR) for advanced-stage prostate cancer was estimated with weighted logistic regression analysis. All P: values were two-sided. RESULTS: Clinically advanced-stage prostate cancers were detected more frequently in African-Americans (12.3%) and Hispanics (10.5%) than in non-Hispanic whites (6.3%). Socioeconomic, clinical, and pathologic factors each accounted for about 15% of the increased relative risk. After adjusting for all covariates, the risk remained statistically significantly increased for African-Americans (OR = 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.43 to 3.58) but not for Hispanics (OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 0.73 to 2.08). CONCLUSION: Traditional socioeconomic, clinical, and pathologic factors accounted for the increased relative risk for presenting with advanced-stage prostate cancer in Hispanic but not in African-American men.

Relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of methods of androgen suppression in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: With 184,500 new cases and 39,200 deaths anticipated in 1998, prostate cancer is second only to lung cancer in cancer mortality for men. This report is a systematic review of the evidence from randomized controlled trials on the relative effectiveness of alternative strategies for androgen suppression as treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Three key issues are addressed: (1) the relative effectiveness of the available methods for monotherapy (orchiectomy, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] agonists, and antiandrogens), (2) the effectiveness of combined androgen blockade compared to monotherapy, and (3) the effectiveness of immediate androgen suppression compared to androgen suppression deferred until clinical progression. Outcomes of interest are overall, cancer-specific, and progression-free survival; time to treatment failure; adverse effects; and quality of life. Two supplementary analyses were conducted for each key question: (1) meta-analysis of overall survival at 2 years (questions 1 and 2) and 5 years (questions 2 and 3), and (2) cost-effectiveness analysis. SEARCH STRATEGY: The MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, and EMBASE databases were searched from 1966 to March 1998, and Current Contents to August 24, 1998, for the terms: leuprolide (Lupron); goserelin (Zoladex); buserelin (Suprefact); flutamide (Eulexin); nilutamide (Anandron, Nilandron); bicalutamide (Casodex); cyproterone acetate (Androcur); diethylstilbestrol (DES); and orchiectomy (castration, orchidectomy). The search was then limited to human studies indexed under the MeSH term "prostatic neoplasms" and by the UK Cochrane Center search strategy for randomized controlled trials. Total yield was 1,477 references. SELECTION CRITERIA: We Reports of efficacy outcomes were limited to randomized controlled trials. Phase II studies that reported on withdrawals from therapy and all studies reporting on quality of life were also included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The systematic review used a prospectively designed protocol conducted by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus. The meta-analysis combined data on overall survival using a random effects model. The cost-effectiveness analysis used a decision analysis model of advanced prostate cancer with health states and transitions derived from the literature and estimates of effectiveness derived from the meta-analysis. The cost-effectiveness analysis is conducted from a societal perspective, consistent with the guidelines of the U.S. Public Health Service Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. MAIN RESULTS: Survival after treatment with an LHRH agonist is equivalent to survival after orchiectomy. The available LHRH agonists are equally effective, and no LHRH agonist is superior to the other when adverse effects are considered. Survival may be somewhat lower with use of a nonsteroidal antiandrogen. There is no statistically significant difference in survival at 2 years between patients treated with combined androgen blockade or monotherapy. Meta-analysis of the limited data available shows a statistically significant difference in survival at 5 years that favors combined androgen blockade. However, the magnitude of this difference is of questionable clinical significance. For the subgroup of patients with good prognosis, there is no statistically significant difference in survival. Adverse effects leading to withdrawal from therapy occurred more often with combined androgen blockade. No evidence is yet available from randomized controlled trials of androgen suppression initiated at prostate-specific antigen (PSA) rise after definitive therapy for clinically localized disease. For patients who are newly diagnosed with locally advanced or asymptomatic metastatic disease, the evidence is insufficient to determine whether primary androgen suppression initiated at diagnosis improves outcomes. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)