Regional, provider, and economic factors associated with the choice of active surveillance in the treatment of men with localized prostate cancer

Abstract

Data on initial treatment of 8232 cases of localized prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004 were obtained by medical record abstraction (including hospital and outpatient locations) from seven state cancer registries participating in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Breast and Prostate Cancer Data Quality and Patterns of Care Study. Distinction was made between men receiving no therapy with no monitoring plan (no therapy/no plan [NT/NP]) and those receiving active surveillance (AS). Overall, 8.6% received NT/NP and 4.7% received AS. Older age at diagnosis, lower clinical risk group, and certain registry locations were significant predictors of use of both AS and NT/NP. AS was also related to having more severe comorbidities, whereas nonwhite race was predicted receiving NT/NP. Men receiving AS lived in areas with a higher number of urologists per 100 000 men than those receiving NT/NP. In summary, physician and clinical factors were stronger predictors of AS, whereas demographic and regional factors were related to receiving NT/NP. Physicians appear reluctant to recommend AS for younger patients with no comorbidities.

Figure 1.

Percent distribution of localized prostate cancer cases by number of urologists per 100 000 men within county of residence by type of therapy for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2004 Breast and Prostate Cancer Data Quality and Patterns of Care Study. P = .015 for difference between active surveillance and no therapy/no plan.