Physician social networks and variation in prostate cancer treatment in three cities.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pollack CE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3258347 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Physician social networks and variation in prostate cancer treatment in three cities.
Pollack Craig Evan CE Weissman Gary G Bekelman Justin J Liao Kaijun K Armstrong Katrina K
Health services research 20111018 1 Pt 2
<h4>Objective</h4>To examine whether physician social networks are associated with variation in treatment for men with localized prostate cancer.<h4>Data source</h4>2004-2005 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data from three cities.<h4>Study design</h4>We identified the physicians who care for patients with prostate cancer and created physician networks for each city based on shared patients. Subgroups of urologists were defined as physicians with dense connections with one ano ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesVariation in care within and across geographic areas remains poorly understood. The goal of this article was to examine whether physician social networks-as defined by shared patients-are associated with rates of complications after radical prostatectomy.MethodsIn five cities, we constructed networks of physicians on the basis of their shared patients in 2004-2005 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data. From these networks, we identified subgroups of urologists who most frequently shared patients with one another. Among men with localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy, we used multilevel analysis with generalized linear mixed-effect models to examine whether physician network structure-along with specific characteristics of the network subgroups-was associated with rates of 30-day and late urinary complications, and long-term incontinence after accounting for patient-level sociodemographic, clinical factors, and urologist patient volume.ResultsNetworks included 2677 men in five cities who underwent radical prostatectomy. The unadjusted rate of 30-day surgical complications varied across network subgroups from an 18.8 percentage-point difference in the rate of complications across network subgroups in city 1 to a 26.9 percentage-point difference in city 5. Large differences in unadjusted rates of late urinary complications and long-term incontinence across subgroups were similarly found. Network subgroup characteristics-average urologist centrality and patient racial composition-were significantly associated with rates of surgical complications.ConclusionsAnalysis of physician networks using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data provides insight into observed variation in rates of complications for localized prostate cancer. If validated, such approaches may be used to target future quality improvement interventions.
| S-EPMC4135395 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results (SEER) registry data abstracted from a priority 2 or higher reporting source from 2006 to 2008 were used to compare treatment patterns in 45-64-year old men diagnosed with locoregional prostate cancer (LRPC) across states with or without radiation therapy-directed certificate of need (CON) laws and across independent cancer centers (ICCs) compared to large multi-specialty groups (LMSGs). Adjusted treatment percentages for the five most common LRPC treatments (surgery, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), combination brachytherapy with EBRT, brachytherapy, and observation) were compared using cross-sectional logistic regression between CON-unregulated and -regulated states and between LMSGs and ICCs. LRPC EBRT rates were no different across CON regions, but are increased in ICCs compared to LMSGs (37.00% vs. 13.23%, P < 0.001). Variation in LRPC treatment patterns by reporting source merits further scrutiny under the Affordable Care Act of 2010, considering the intent of incentivized accountable care organizations (ACOs) established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) and the implications of early descriptions of these new healthcare provider organizations on prostate cancer treatment patterns.
| S-EPMC4401240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop prostate cancer-specific physician-hospital networks to define hospital-based units that more accurately group hospitals, providers, and the patients they serve.MethodsUsing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare, we identified men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2007 and 2011. We created physician-hospital networks by assigning each patient to a physician and each physician to a hospital based on treatment patterns. We assessed content validity by examining characteristics of hospitals anchoring the physician-hospital networks and of the patients associated with these hospitals.ResultsWe identified 42,963 patients associated with 344 physician-hospital networks. Networks anchored by a teaching hospital (compared to a nonteaching hospital) had higher median numbers of prostate cancer patients (117 [interquartile range {71-189} vs 82 {50-126}]) and treating physicians (7 [4-11] vs 4 [3-6]) (both P <0.001). On average, patients traveled farther to networks anchored by a teaching hospital (49 miles [standard deviation] [207] vs 41 [183]; P <.001). Hospitals known as high-volume centers for robotic prostatectomies, proton-beam therapy, and active surveillance had network rates for these procedures well above the mean. Hospitals known as safety net providers served higher proportions of minorities.ConclusionWe empirically developed prostate-cancer specific physician-hospital networks that exhibit content validity and are relevant from a clinical and policy perspective. They have the potential to become targets for policy interventions focused on improving the delivery of prostate cancer care.
| S-EPMC7141943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the influence of patient preferences and urologist recommendations in treatment decisions for clinically localized prostate cancer.We enrolled 257 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (prostate-specific antigen <20; Gleason score 6 or 7) seen by urologists (primarily residents and fellows) in 4 Veterans Affairs medical centers. We measured patients' baseline preferences prior to their urology appointments, including initial treatment preference, cancer-related anxiety, and interest in sex. In longitudinal follow-up, we determined which treatment patients received. We used hierarchical logistic regression to determine the factors that predicted treatment received (active treatment v. active surveillance) and urologist recommendations. We also conducted a directed content analysis of recorded clinical encounters to determine if urologists discussed patients' interest in sex.Patients' initial treatment preferences did not predict receipt of active treatment versus surveillance, ??2(4) = 3.67, P = 0.45. Instead, receipt of active treatment was predicted primarily by urologists' recommendations, ??2(2) = 32.81, P < 0.001. Urologists' recommendations, in turn, were influenced heavily by medical factors (age and Gleason score) but were unrelated to patient preferences, ??2(6) = 0, P = 1. Urologists rarely discussed patients' interest in sex (<15% of appointments).Patients' treatment decisions were based largely on urologists' recommendations, which, in turn, were based on medical factors (age and Gleason score) and not on patients' personal views of the relative pros and cons of treatment alternatives.
| S-EPMC5587215 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundRecent approvals of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) have changed the treatment landscape for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These SGARIs have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment to explore how United States physicians make treatment decisions between adverse events (AEs) and survival gains in nmCRPC, a largely asymptomatic disease.MethodsTreating physicians (n = 149) participated in an online survey that included 14 treatment choice questions, each comparing 2 hypothetical treatment profiles, which varied in terms of 5 safety and 2 efficacy attributes. We described safety attributes (fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, falls, and fractures) in terms of severity and frequency, and efficacy attributes (overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression) in terms of duration of effect. We used a random parameters logit model to estimate preference weights and importance scores for each attribute. We also estimated the amount of survival gain physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in specific AEs between treatment options.ResultsPhysicians placed more importance on survival than on time to pain progression, and viewed a reduction in cognitive problems from severe to none, a reduction in risk of a serious fracture from 8% to none, and a reduction in fatigue from severe to none as the most important safety attributes. Physicians were willing to forego 9.1 and 6.6 months of OS, respectively, to reduce cognitive problems and fatigue from severe to mild-to-moderate. To reduce the risk of a serious fracture from 8 to 5% and 5% to none, physicians were willing to trade 3.9 and 5.3 months of OS, respectively.ConclusionsPhysicians were willing to trade substantial amounts of survival to avoid AEs between hypothetical treatments. These results emphasize the importance of carefully balancing therapies' benefits and risks to ultimately optimize the overall quality of nmCRPC patients' survival. Nonetheless, it is noted that the results from the study sample of 149 physicans may not be representative of the viewpoints of all nmCRPC-treating physicians.
| S-EPMC7310549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceUp-front treatment of older men with low-risk prostate cancer can cause morbidity without clear survival benefit; however, most such patients receive treatment instead of observation. The impact of physicians on the management approach is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine the impact of physicians on the management of low-risk prostate cancer with up-front treatment vs observation.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort of men 66 years and older with low-risk prostate cancer diagnosed from 2006 through 2009. Patient and tumor characteristics were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries. The diagnosing urologist, consulting radiation oncologist, cancer-directed therapy, and comorbid medical conditions were determined from linked Medicare claims. Physician characteristics were obtained from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. Mixed-effects models were used to evaluate management variation and factors associated with observation.Main outcomes and measuresNo cancer-directed therapy within 12 months of diagnosis (observation).ResultsA total of 2145 urologists diagnosed low-risk prostate cancer in 12,068 men, of whom 80.1% received treatment and 19.9% were observed. The case-adjusted rate of observation varied widely across urologists, ranging from 4.5% to 64.2% of patients. The diagnosing urologist accounted for 16.1% of the variation in up-front treatment vs observation, whereas patient and tumor characteristics accounted for 7.9% of this variation. After adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics, urologists who treat non-low-risk prostate cancer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.55-0.92]; P = .01) and graduated in earlier decades (P = .004) were less likely to manage low-risk disease with observation. Treated patients were more likely to undergo prostatectomy (aOR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.45-2.01]; P < .001), cryotherapy (aOR, 28.2 [95% CI, 19.5-40.9]; P < .001), brachytherapy (aOR, 3.41 [95% CI, 2.96-3.93]; P < .001), or external-beam radiotherapy (aOR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.08-1.58]; P = .005) if their urologist billed for that treatment. Case-adjusted rates of observation also varied across consulting radiation oncologists, ranging from 2.2% to 46.8% of patients.Conclusions and relevanceRates of management of low-risk prostate cancer with observation varied widely across urologists and radiation oncologists. Patients whose diagnosis was made by urologists who treated prostate cancer were more likely to receive up-front treatment and, when treated, more likely to receive a treatment that their urologist performed. Public reporting of physicians' cancer management profiles would enable informed selection of physicians to diagnose and manage prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC4372187 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Black community has higher rates of colorectal cancer and lower rates of colorectal cancer screenings than whites. Getting screened through FIT testing may help catch colorectal cancer earlier, when it is easier to treat. MSK has created a program to help people who have been FIT tested to also help their peers (family, friends, and colleagues) in their community get FIT tested. The researchers think that training people on peer outreach, such as telling people in your social network about FIT testing and how to get it, may increase the rate of colorectal cancer screening. The purpose of this study is to see if training people on peer outreach increases the number of people who get screened for colorectal cancer through FIT testing.
| 13378 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:This trial examines cancer communication within Hispanic social networks. Hispanics have the lowest colorectal cancer screening rate of any major ethnic group and health interventions are crucially needed among Hispanics. Patient decision aids are health communication interventions designed to provide patients with targeted health information and have shown to improve colorectal cancer screening rates among Hispanics. The goal of this study is to investigate, in a sample of Hispanics, how a colorectal cancer decision aid aimed at increasing individuals’ colorectal cancer screening behavior has effects on their alters’ intention to get screened for colorectal cancer.
| 2343521 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:<p><font color="#FF0000"><b>Note: Data Use Restrictions:</b> <ul> <li>The data <i><u>must only</u></i> be used for genetic research projects solely in the area of health-related social-network research.</li> </ul> </font> </p> <p>This study compiles detailed information on family and social ties linked to participants in the offspring cohort of the Framingham Heart Study. The investigators took computerized information from self-report data used by the FHS for over 30 years to facilitate health exam scheduling. These tracking sheets asked participants to identify people close to them, which were assumed by the investigators to indicate a social tie. Individuals are listed as "egos" (if the ties are from their perspective) and/or "alters" (if they are linked as a friend or family members to one of the other participants). All egos were FHS offspring participants while alters could be FHS participants in any cohort or non-participants. This information was combined with internal FHS pedigree data on family ties to list family member alters (as well as the nature of their relationship). The resultant dataset therefore includes each ego-alter tie, the nature of their relationship and the start and end dates for their ties for each of seven waves for the offspring study.</p> <p>Due to privacy concerns, all exam dates for individuals are listed relative to the initial FHS exam date. The study investigators chose a random, confidential date, to which all initial exam dates are linked (by number of months from random date to initial exam date). With this information, researchers can have access to the temporal relationships among participants' exam dates while remaining unaware of the actual exam dates for individual participants.</p> <p>During each clinic exam cycle, the participants undergo a detailed examination including physical examination, medical history, laboratory testing, and electrocardiogram. Over the years, other tests (that may not be performed at every exam cycle) have included pulmonary function, lifestyle, physical function, cognitive function questionnaires, and various noninvasive cardiovascular tests including echocardiograms. This study involves phenotypic data from these exams including (when available) basic body measurements (height, weight, blood pressure), laboratory values (blood sugar levels, LDL levels), information on smoking and alcohol use, and tests of depression and cognitive functioning.</p> <p><b>Important links to apply for individual-level data</b> <ol> <li><a href="http://dbgap.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/aa/wga.cgi?view_pdf&stacc=phs000153.v3.p3" target="_blank">Data Use Certification Requirements (DUC)</a></li> <li><a href="GetPdf.cgi?id=phd001183.1" target="_blank">Instructions to Request Authorized Access</a></li> <li><a href="http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/dbgap-controlled" target="_blank">Apply here for controlled access to individual level data</a></li> <li><a href="GetPdf.cgi?id=phd000317" target="_blank">Participant Protection Policy FAQ</a></li> </ol> </p> <p>In 1948, researchers recruited men and women from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts, beginning the first round of extensive physical examinations and lifestyle interviews that would later be analyzed for common patterns related to CVD development.</p> <p>Initially, the Framingham Heart Study enrolled 5,209 men and women from the Framingham area who were between the ages of 28 and 62 years. Beginning in 1971, the Framingham Heart Study enrolled 5,124 men and women, who were either offspring of the original cohort or spouses of those offspring. In 2002, 4,095 third generation participants (men and women) were enrolled.</p>
| phs000153.v5.p5 | EGA
Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer is one of the most widespread cancers in men and is fundamentally a genetic disease. Identifying regulators in cancer using novel systems biology approaches will potentially lead to new insight into this disease. It was sought to address this by inferring gene regulatory networks (GRNs). Moreover, dynamical analysis of GRNs can explain how regulators change among different conditions, such as cancer subtypes.MethodsIn our approach, independent gene regulatory networks from each prostate state were reconstructed using one of the current state-of-art reverse engineering approaches. Next, crucial genes involved in this cancer were highlighted by analyzing each network individually and also in comparison with each other.ResultsIn this paper, a novel network-based approach was introduced to find critical transcription factors involved in prostate cancer. The results led to detection of 38 essential transcription factors based on hub type variation. Additionally, experimental evidence was found for 29 of them as well as 9 new transcription factors.ConclusionThe results showed that dynamical analysis of biological networks may provide useful information to gain better understanding of the cell.
| S-EPMC4388891 | biostudies-literature