Dataset Information

The Development and Validation of Prostate Cancer-specific Physician-Hospital Networks.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To develop prostate cancer-specific physician-hospital networks to define hospital-based units that more accurately group hospitals, providers, and the patients they serve.

Methods

Using 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.

Results

We 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.

Conclusion

We 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.

SUBMITTER: Jacobs BL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7141943 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo explore the possible predicting factors related to prostate cancer and develop a validated nomogram for predicting the probability of patients with prostate cancer.MethodClinical data of 697 patients who underwent prostate biopsy in Handan Central Hospital from January 2014 to January 2020 were retrospectively collected. Cases were randomized into two groups: 80% (548 cases) as the development group, and 20% (149 cases) as the validation group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the independent risk factors for prostate cancer. The nomogram prediction model was generated using the finalized independent risk factors. Decision curve analysis (DCA) and the area under receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) of both development group and validation group were calculated and compared to validate the accuracy and efficiency of the nomogram prediction model. Clinical utility curve (CUC) helped to decide the desired cut-off value for the prediction model. The established nomogram with Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial Derived Cancer Risk Calculator (PCPT-CRC) and other domestic prediction models using the entire study population were compared.ResultsThe independent risk factors determined through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were: age, tPSA, fPSA, PV, DRE, TRUS and BMI. Nomogram prediction model was developed with the cut-off value of 0.31. The AUC of development group and validation group were 0.856 and 0.797 respectively. DCA exhibits consistent observations with the findings. Through validating our prediction model as well as other three domestic prediction models based on the entire study population of 697 cases, our prediction model demonstrated significantly higher predictive value than all the other models.ConclusionThe nomogram for predicting prostate cancer can facilitate more accurate evaluation of the probability of having prostate cancer, and provide better ground for prostate biopsy.

Project description:ObjectiveProstate cancer (PC) is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy in men worldwide. Accurate predicting the survival of elderly PC patients can help reduce mortality in patients. We aimed to construct nomograms to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) in elderly PC patients.MethodsInformation on PC patients aged 65 years and older was downloaded from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were used to determine independent risk factors for PC patients. Nomograms were developed to predict the CSS and OS of elderly PC patients based on a multivariate Cox regression model. The accuracy and discrimination of the prediction model were tested by the consistency index (C-index), the area under the subject operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the calibration curve. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to test the clinical value of the nomograms compared with the TNM staging system and D'Amico risk stratification system.Results135183 elderly PC patients in 2010-2018 were included. All patients were randomly assigned to the training set (N=94764) and the validation set (N=40419). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression model analysis revealed that age, race, marriage, histological grade, TNM stage, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, biopsy Gleason score (GS), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were independent risk factors for predicting CSS and OS in elderly patients with PC. The C-index of the training set and the validation set for predicting CSS was 0.883(95%CI:0.877-0.889) and 0.887(95%CI:0.877-0.897), respectively. The C-index of the training set and the validation set for predicting OS was 0.77(95%CI:0.766-0.774)and 0.767(95%CI:0.759-0.775), respectively. It showed that the proposed model has excellent discriminative ability. The AUC and the calibration curves also showed good accuracy and discriminability. The DCA showed that the nomograms for CSS and OS have good clinical potential value.ConclusionsWe developed new nomograms to predict CSS and OS in elderly PC patients. The models have been internally validated with good accuracy and reliability and can help doctors and patients to make better clinical decisions.

Project description:ImportanceIn 2016, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) established criteria to evaluate prediction models for staging. No localized prostate cancer models were endorsed by the Precision Medicine Core committee, and 8th edition staging was based on expert consensus.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a pretreatment clinical prognostic stage group system for nonmetastatic prostate cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis multinational cohort study included 7 centers from the United States, Canada, and Europe, the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Veterans Affairs Medical Centers collaborative (5 centers), and the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry (43 centers) (the STAR-CAP cohort). Patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2013 (follow-up completed December 31, 2017). The STAR-CAP cohort was randomly divided into training and validation data sets; statisticians were blinded to the validation data until the model was locked. A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort was used as a second validation set. Analysis was performed from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019.ExposuresCurative intent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy.Main outcomes and measuresProstate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Based on a competing-risk regression model, a points-based Score staging system was developed. Model discrimination (C index), calibration, and overall performance were assessed in the validation cohorts.ResultsOf 19 684 patients included in the analysis (median age, 64.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-70.0] years), 12 421 were treated with RP and 7263 with radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 71.8 (IQR, 34.3-124.3) months; 4078 (20.7%) were followed up for at least 10 years. Age, T category, N category, Gleason grade, pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, and the percentage of positive core biopsy results among biopsies performed were included as variables. In the validation set, predicted 10-year PCSM for the 9 Score groups ranged from 0.3% to 40.0%. The 10-year C index (0.796; 95% CI, 0.760-0.828) exceeded that of the AJCC 8th edition (0.757; 95% CI, 0.719-0.792), which was improved across age, race, and treatment modality and within the SEER validation cohort. The Score system performed similarly to individualized random survival forest and interaction models and outperformed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk grouping 3- and 4-tier classification systems (10-year C index for NCCN 3-tier, 0.729; for NCCN 4-tier, 0.746; for Score, 0.794) as well as CAPRA (10-year C index for CAPRA, 0.760; for Score, 0.782).Conclusions and relevanceUsing a large, diverse international cohort treated with standard curative treatment options, a proposed AJCC-compliant clinical prognostic stage group system for prostate cancer has been developed. This system may allow consistency of reporting and interpretation of results and clinical trial design.