Dataset Information

Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the performance of published guidelines compared with that of current practice for radiographic staging of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.Using data from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative clinical registry, we identified 1509 men diagnosed with prostate cancer from March 2012 through June 2013. Clinical data included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score (GS), clinical trial stage, number of biopsy cores, and bone scan (BS) results. We then fit a multivariate logistic regression model to examine the association between clinical variables and the occurrence of bone metastases. Because some patients did not undergo BS, we used established methods to correct for verification bias and estimate the diagnostic accuracy of published guidelines.Among 416 men who received a BS, 48 (11.5%) had evidence of bone metastases. Patients with bone metastases were older, with higher PSA levels and GS (all P <.05). In multivariate analyses, PSA (P <.001) and GS (P = .004) were the only independent predictors of positive BS. Guidelines from the American Urological Association and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network demonstrated similar performance in detecting bone metastases in our population, with fewer negative study results than those of the European Association of Urology guideline. Applying the American Urological Association recommendations (ie, image when PSA level >20 ng/mL or GS ? 8) to current clinical practice, we estimate that <1% of positive study results would be missed, whereas the number of negative study results would be reduced by 38%.Based on current practice patterns, more uniform application of existing guidelines would ensure that BS is performed for almost all men with bone metastases, while avoiding many negative imaging studies.

SUBMITTER: Merdan S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4755476 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Merdan Selin S Womble Paul R PR Miller David C DC Barnett Christine C Ye Zaojun Z Linsell Susan M SM Montie James E JE Denton Brian T BT

Urology 20140802 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the performance of published guidelines compared with that of current practice for radiographic staging of men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Using data from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative clinical registry, we identified 1509 men diagnosed with prostate cancer from March 2012 through June 2013. Clinical data included age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score (GS), clinical trial stage, n ...[more]

PMID: 25096341

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionProstate cancer remains the 3rd leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Canadian men, and yet screening for prostate cancer continues to be controversial because the majority of men diagnosed with prostate cancer do not die of the disease. It also remains uncertain whether treatment of cases that can be treated with curative intent alters the mortality rate. There are very few studies describing the presenting stage, risk groups, and survival after diagnosis for men dying of prostate cancer in the literature. In this study, we explored these characteristics for all men who died of prostate cancer in British Columbia between 2013 and 2015.MethodsThe population-based BC Cancer databases were used to identify all patients diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2015 who died of prostate cancer. Patient, tumour, and treatment characteristics were collected, and the risk grouping for each tumour was determined. The proportion of cases in each risk group at the time of diagnosis was determined. Survival time from diagnosis to death was calculated for all patients and for each risk group using the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsA total of 1256 patients died of prostate cancer. Of patients who presented with metastatic disease, 57.2% presented with a Gleason score of 8 or more, compared with only 35.7% of patients who presented with nonmetastatic disease (p < 0.0001). The presenting stage and risk group of those dying of prostate cancer were as follows: 32% metastatic disease, 3% regional (defined as node-positive), 39% localized high risk, 9% localized intermediate risk, 4% localized low risk, 6% localized not otherwise specified, and 7% unknown. Therefore, 80.3% of those with a known risk group presented with either localized high-risk, regional, or metastatic disease at diagnosis. The median survival times from diagnosis to death were 12 years for localized low-risk, 10 years for localized intermediate-risk, 6.5 years for localized high-risk, 4 years for regional, and 1.7 years for metastatic disease at diagnosis.ConclusionsThis population-based analysis demonstrates that patients with localized high-risk, regional, or metastatic disease at diagnosis constitute the overwhelming majority of patients who die of prostate cancer in British Columbia. Unless these disease states can reliably be identified at an earlier low- or intermediate-risk localized state in the future, it is unlikely that treatment of localized low- and intermediate-risk cancer will have an impact on survival. Furthermore, patients with de novo metastatic disease had identifiable risk factors of a higher prostate-specific antigen and Gleason score. Further studies are required to confirm these results.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer (LPC) wanting curative treatment face a highly preference-sensitive choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy, which offer similar cure rates but different side effects. This study aims to determine the information, decision-making needs and preferences of men with LPC choosing between robotic prostatectomy and standard external beam or stereotactic radiotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This study will be conducted at a large public teaching hospital in Australia offering the choice between robotic prostatectomy and radiotherapy from early 2017. Men (20-30) diagnosed with LPC who want curative treatment and meet criteria for either treatment will be invited to participate. In this mixed-methods study, patients will complete semistructured interviews before and after attending a combined clinic in which they consult a urologist and a radiation oncologist regarding treatment and four questionnaires (one before treatment decision-making and three after) assessing demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement in decision-making, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret. Combined clinic consultations will also be audio-recorded and clinicians will report their perceptions regarding patients' suitability for, openness to and preferences for each treatment. Qualitative data will be transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed and descriptive statistical analyses will explore quantitative decision-making outcomes, with comparison according to treatment choice. DISCUSSION:Results from this study will inform how to best support men diagnosed with LPC deciding which curative treatment option best suits their needs and may identify the need for and content required in a decision aid to support these men. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:All participants will provide written informed consent. Data will be rigorously managed in accordance with national legislation. Results will be disseminated via presentations to both scientific and layperson audiences and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study was to describe the perspective of patients with early breast cancer toward research biopsies. The authors hypothesized that more patients at academic sites than at community-based sites would be willing to consider these procedures.MethodsIn total, 198 patients with early stage breast cancer were recruited from 3 academic centers (n = 102) and from 1 community oncology practice (n = 96). The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients willing to consider donating excess tissue biospecimens from surgery, from a clinically indicated breast biopsy, or from a research purposes-only biopsy (RPOB) between practice types.ResultsMost patients (93% at academic sites, 94% at the community oncology site) said they would consider donating excess tissue from surgery for research. One-half of patients from academic or community sites would consider donating tissue from a clinically indicated breast biopsy. On univariate analysis, significantly fewer patients from academic sites would consider an RPOB (22% at academic sites, 42% at the community site; P = .003); however, this difference was no longer significant on multivariate analysis (P = .96). Longer transportation times and unfavorable prior experiences were associated with less willingness to consider an RPOB on multivariate analysis. Significantly fewer patients from academic sites (14%) than from the community site (35%) would consider a research biopsy in a clinical trial (P = .04). Contributing to scientific knowledge, return of results, and a personal request by their physician were the strongest factors influencing patients' willingness to undergo research biopsies.ConclusionsThe current results rejected the hypothesis that more patients with early breast cancer at academic sites would be willing to donate tissue biospecimens for research compared with those at community oncology sites. These findings identify modifiable factors to consider in biobanking studies and clinical trials.

Dataset Information

Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Publications

Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets