Descriptive analysis of prostate cancer pathology data from diagnosis and surgery in men from the 45 and Up Study.

Information available from the New South Wales Cancer Registry (NSWCR) about the aggressiveness of prostate cancer is limited to the summary stage variable 'degree of spread', which contains a high proportion of cases defined as 'unknown'. In this study we demonstrate the feasibility of obtaining and analysing prostate cancer pathology data from stored pathology records. Pathology data were extracted from stored pathology records of incident prostate cancer cases in men participating in the 45 and Up Study, a large Australian prospective cohort study, who were diagnosed between January 2006 and December 2013. Baseline questionnaires from the 45 and Up Study were linked to the NSWCR. Demographic and pathology items were tabulated and associations described. We evaluated the completeness of pathological characteristics by degree of spread of cancer at diagnosis. Among the 123,921 men enrolled in the 45 and Up Study, 5,091 had incident prostate cancer and 5,085 were linked to a pathology record. The most complete variables included grade group of diagnostic (85.8%) and surgical (99.8%) specimens, margin status (98.1%), extraprostatic extension (95.1%) and seminal vesicle invasion (96.8%). Most diagnostic specimens were grade group 1 (26.6%) or 2 (23.5%). Of the 5,085 cases, 30.8% were classified by the NSWCR with unknown degree of spread; a pathology record could be extracted for 99.4% of these. The unknown degree of spread cases had similar levels of completeness and distribution of diagnostic and surgical pathology features to those with a localised degree of spread. This study demonstrated the feasibility of obtaining and analysing data derived from pathology reports from centralised state-based cancer registry notifications. Supplementing degree of spread information with pathology data from diagnosis and surgery will improve both the quality of research and policy aimed at improving the lives of men with prostate cancer.

Socioeconomic differences in prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the 1990s, most nations have had a reduction or stabilisation in prostate cancer mortality. However, socioeconomic differences in disease specific mortality and survival have persisted. This has been partially attributed to differences in treatment choices. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to describe and quantify socioeconomic differences in use of prostate cancer treatment in the literature. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL and Embase were searched from 01 January 2000-01 April 2021 to identify articles that reported use of prostate cancer treatment by socioeconomic status. Random effects meta-analysis was used to analyse socioeconomic differences in treatment where there was more than one study for treatment type. A modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Out of 7267 articles identified, eight met the inclusion criteria and six were analysed using meta-analysis. Meta-analysis could only be completed for non-active treatment (watchful waiting/active surveillance). Lower education was associated with non-active treatment (OR=0.90, [95% CI 0.83-0.98], p=0.02, I2=67%), however, level of income was not (OR=0.87, [CI 0.75-1.02], p=0.08, I2=94%). Sensitivity analysis of studies where active surveillance was the outcome (n=3), indicated no associations with level of income (OR=0.91, [95% CI 0.82-1.01], p=0.08, I2=52%) or education (OR=0.88, [95% CI 0.70-1.10], p=0.25, I2=79%). All studies were assessed as high-risk of bias. DISCUSSION: The relationship between socioeconomic status and prostate cancer treatment depended on the socioeconomic variable being used, the treatment type and how it was defined in research. Considerable methodological limitations were identified. Further research should improve on previous findings and address current gaps.