Variation in Locoregional Prostate Cancer Care and Treatment Trends at Commission on Cancer Designated Facilities: A National Cancer Data Base Analysis 2004 to 2013
Contemporary treatment trends for prostate cancer show increased rates of active surveillance. However, nationwide applicability of these reports is limited. Additionally, the effect of Commission on Cancer facility type on prostate cancer treatment patterns is unknown.
We used the National Cancer Data Base to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer, between 2004 and 2013. Our cohort was stratified on the basis of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network prostate cancer risk classes. Cochran-Armitage tests were used to evaluate temporal trends. Random effects hierarchical logit models were used to assess treatment variation at Commission on Cancer facility and institution level.
In 825,707 men, utilization of radiation therapy declined and utilization of radical prostatectomy increased for all prostate cancer risk groups between 2004 and 2013 (P < .0001). Observation for low-risk prostate cancer increased from 16.3% in 2004 to 2005 to 32.0% in 2012 to 2013 (P < .0001). Significant treatment variation was observed on the basis of Commission on Cancer facility type. Across all risk groups, the lowest rates of radical prostatectomy and highest rates of external beam radiation therapy were observed in community cancer programs. The highest rates of observation for low-risk disease were observed in academic centers. Treatment variation according to institution ranged from 14% (95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.15) for androgen deprivation therapy up to 59% (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.73) for cryotherapy.
The increased utilization of observation in low-risk prostate cancer is an encouraging finding, which appears to be mainly derived by a decrease in radiotherapy utilization in this risk group. Regardless of tumor characteristics, significant variations in treatment modality exist among different facility types and institutions.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,477,297
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
#427
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,846
of 323,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
#9
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,036 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,575 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
