Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Are We Failing Latino Patients at a Large Safety Net Hospital?

被引:6
|
作者
Ballas, Leslie K. [1 ]
Kraus, Ryan [1 ]
Ji, Lingyun [2 ]
Groshen, Susan [2 ]
Stern, Mariana C. [2 ,3 ]
Gill, Inderbir [3 ]
Quinn, David, I [4 ]
Chung, Eugene [5 ]
Abreu, Andre [3 ]
Hamilton, Ann S. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Radiat Oncol, 1441 Easlake Ave,Norris G350, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA
[2] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Preventat Med, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA
[3] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Urol, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA
[4] Univ Southern Calif, Keck Sch Med, Dept Med Oncol, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA
[5] Porter Adventist Hosp, Radiat Oncol, Denver, CO USA
关键词
Active monitoring; Health care disparities; Low-risk prostate cancer; Socioeconomic status; Watchful waiting; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; SOCIOECONOMIC-STATUS; DISPARITIES; TRENDS; MANAGEMENT; SURVIVAL; RECEIPT;
D O I
10.1016/j.clgc.2018.01.018
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
We sought to determine whether non-clinical trial patients adhere to active surveillance (AS) protocols and to discover how many were lost to follow-up (LTFU) at 2 institutions in California. Patients on AS from lower socioeconomic status strata were more often LTFU, and LTFU was significantly different between the 2 institutions. Multivariable analysis revealed that the main determinant of LTFU was socioeconomic status. Introduction: Active surveillance (AS) is one recommended option for low-risk prostate cancer and involves close follow-up and monitoring. Our objective was to determine whether non-clinical trial patients adhere to AS protocols and how many are lost to follow-up (LTFU). Patients and Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer who initiated AS at Los Angeles County Hospital (LAC) and University of Southern California Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center (Norris) between January 1, 2008, and January 1, 2015. Competing-risks regression analyses examined the difference in LTFU rates of AS patients in the 2 institutions and examined the association between LTFU and patient characteristics. We used California Cancer Registry data to verify if patients LTFU were monitored and/or treated at other LAC medical facilities. Results: We found 116 patients at LAC and 98 at Norris who met the AS criteria for this study. Patients at LAC and Norris had similar tumor characteristics but differed in median income, race, primary language spoken, distance residing from hospital, and socioeconomic status (SES). LTFU was significantly different between the institutions: 57 +/- 7% at LAC and 32 +/- 6% at Norris at 5 years (P < .001). By multivariable analysis, the main determinant of LTFU was SES (P = .045). By 5 years, the chance of an LAC patient remaining on AS was 8 +/- 6% compared to 20 +/- 6% for a Norris patient (P < .001). Conclusion: Successful AS implementation relies on patient follow-up. We found that patients on AS from lower SES strata are more often LTFU. Identifying barriers to follow-up and compliance among low SES patients is critical to ensure optimal AS.
引用
收藏
页码:E719 / E727
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Use and early mortality outcomes of active surveillance in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer
    Butler, Santino S.
    Mahal, Brandon A.
    Lamba, Nayan
    Mossanen, Matthew
    Martin, Neil E.
    Mouw, Kent W.
    Nguyen, Paul L.
    Muralidhar, Vinayak
    CANCER, 2019, 125 (18) : 3164 - 3171
  • [22] Active surveillance of prostate cancer
    Ploussard, G.
    Hennequin, C.
    Rozet, F.
    CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE, 2017, 21 (6-7): : 437 - 441
  • [23] Active surveillance for prostate cancer
    Romero-Otero, Javier
    Garcia-Gomez, Borja
    Duarte-Ojeda, Jose M.
    Rodriguez-Antolin, Alfredo
    Vilaseca, Antoni
    Carlsson, Sigrid V.
    Touijer, Karim A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 23 (03) : 211 - 218
  • [24] Active surveillance in prostate cancer
    Erne, E.
    Kaufmann, S.
    Nikolaou, K.
    Stenzl, A.
    Bedke, J.
    UROLOGE, 2019, 58 (05): : 511 - 517
  • [25] Comparison of Cancer Care and Outcomes between a Public Safety-Net Hospital and a Private Cancer Center
    Bayraktar, Ulas Darda
    Warsch, Sean
    Chen, Emerson
    Lima, Caio Max Rocha
    Pereira, Denise
    JOURNAL OF HEALTH CARE FOR THE POOR AND UNDERSERVED, 2013, 24 (03) : 1136 - 1149
  • [26] Active surveillance for secondary prevention of prostate cancer
    Seisen, T.
    Roupret, M.
    Cussenot, O.
    Rozet, F.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2012, 22 : 10 - 14
  • [27] Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Progress and Promise
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    Carroll, Peter R.
    Klotz, Laurence
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2011, 29 (27) : 3669 - 3676
  • [28] Active surveillance of prostate cancer
    Bolenz, Christian
    Grimm, Marc-Oliver
    Heidenreich, Axel
    Kristiansen, Glen
    Schimmoeller, Lars
    Schmidt, Stefanie
    Schostak, Martin
    Hadaschik, Boris
    UROLOGIE, 2025,
  • [29] Active surveillance for prostate cancer
    Shill, Daniela K.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    Ehdaie, Behfar
    Vickers, Andrew J.
    Carlsson, Sigrid, V
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2021, 10 (06) : 2809 - 2819
  • [30] Active surveillance in prostate cancer: a concept analysis
    Horrill, Tara
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2016, 25 (7-8) : 1166 - 1172