Prostate cancer screening practice among men age 75 and older: Results from a national survey

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16034-e16034
Author(s):  
K. E. Hoffman ◽  
A. V. D'Amico
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Poor Health ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Poor Health Status ◽  
Screening Practice ◽  
Psa Screening

e16034 Background: The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force recently recommended not to screen men aged 75 and older for prostate cancer. This study evaluated the use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening among men age 75 and older prior to this declaration. Methods: The study cohort comprised 718 men age 75 or older without a history of prostate cancer who responded to the 2005 National Health Interview Survey, representing an estimated 4.47 million non-institutionalized men annually. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with PSA screening. Results: Of the 718 men, 19.2 % were age 85 or older, 42.2% reported fair or poor health, 24% had two or more significant diseases and 10.9% were dependent in at least one instrumental activity of daily living (IADL). More than half (51.6%) underwent PSA screening within the previous two years. Men who reported poor health status (42.2 vs. 55.2%, p=0.005) and men who had difficulty with at least one IADL (37.4 vs. 53.3%, p=0.010) were less likely to have a screening PSA. After adjustment for age, race, education status, and physician access, poor health status (adjusted odds (AOR): 0.70, 95% CI (CI): 0.45 to 1.10; p = 0.119), two or more significant diseases (AOR: 0.78, CI: 0.48 to 1.27; p = 0.333) and difficulty with at least one IADL (AOR: 0.71, CI: 0.42, 1.20; p = 0.202) were not associated with the use of PSA screening. Of the 104 men likely to live for five years or less because of poor health, 35.0% underwent PSA screening. Conclusions: Health status, a predictor of life expectancy, should be considered when determining which men receive PSA screening. This would reduce the use of PSA screening in men unlikely to benefit. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Prostate cancer screening among family physicians in Ontario: An update on attitudes and current practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. E53-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Paul Akerman ◽  
Christopher B. Allard ◽  
Camilla Tajzler ◽  
Anil Kapoor
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Preventive Health Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Screening Practices ◽  
Psa Screening

Introduction: This study serves as an update of prostate cancer screening practices among family physicians in Ontario, Canada. Since this population was first surveyed in 2010, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) and the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released recommendations against prostate cancer screening.Methods: An online survey was developed through input from urologists and family practitioners. It was distributed via email to all members of the Ontario Medical Association’s Section on General and Family practice (11 657 family physicians). A reminder email was sent at two weeks and the survey remained active for one month.Results: A total of 1880 family physicians completed surveys (response rate 16.1%). Overall, 80.4% offered prostate cancer screening compared to 91.7% when surveyed in 2010. Physicians new to practice (two years or less) were the most likely to not offer screening (24.6%). A combination of digital rectal exam (DRE) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) remained the most common form of screening (58.3%). Following the release of the CTFPHC recommendations, 45.6% of respondents said they now screen fewer patients. Participants were less familiar with national urological society guidelines compared to task force recommendations. The majority (72.6%) of respondents feel PSA screening leads to overdiagnosis and treatment. Those surveyed remained split with respect to PSA utility.Conclusions: Data suggest a decline in screening practices since 2010, with newer graduates less likely to offer screening. CFTPHC and USPSTF recommendations had the greatest impact on clinical practice. Those surveyed were divided with respect to PSA utility. Some additional considerations to PSA screening in the primary care setting, including patient-driven factors, were not captured by our concise survey.

scholarly journals Prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer screening: A national survey of Canadian primary care physicians’ opinions and practices

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 396-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Geoffrey Goldenberg ◽  
Sean C. Skeldon ◽  
Madhur Nayan ◽  
Yegappan Suppiah ◽  
Linda Chow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Psa Screening

Introduction: In 2014, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) recommended against routine prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test.1 We surveyed Canadian primary care physicians (PCPs) to understand their opinions and attitudes towards prostate cancer screening in 2016.Methods: Twenty PCPs piloted the survey to assess its accessibility. We distributed a flyer to 19 633 PCPs as an insert in a large mailed package inviting them to attend a national meeting, and later promoted the survey at the meeting. Multinomial logistic regression models examined factors associated with agreement of key guideline statements and the overall benefit of PSA screening.Results: A total of 1254 PCPs responded (rate of 6.4%); 54.7% of physicians aware of the CTFPHC recommendations report screening less often as a result. Overall, 55.6% of PCPs feel that the risks of PSA screening outweigh the benefits. On multivariable analysis, physicians who did not read the guidelines, did not have an academic appointment, or were in practice for over 20 years were significantly more likely to disagree with the statement that men 55‒69 years old should not be screened for prostate cancer with PSA.Conclusions: Our national survey found that the prostate cancer screening practices of Canadian PCPs varies widely across physician demographic groups, with almost equal numbers for or against. This has significant ethical, medical, and legal implications. The poor response rate to highly incentivized survey request may suggest a reluctance or general apathy towards this subject because of the Task Force recommendations. Future efforts should provide physicians with objective guidance around PSA screening, incorporating input from all stakeholders, including PCPs, urologists, and patients.

Clinical implications of the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) PSA screening recommendation in prostate cancer diagnoses and 5-year survival at a Minnesota safety net health care system.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5051-5051
Author(s):  
Kevin Gale ◽  
Daniel Fellows Pease ◽  
Joseph Guinness ◽  
Andres Wiernik
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Number Needed To Screen ◽  
The Impact

5051 Background: Prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer has declined following the USPSTF 2012 recommendation. How screening rates and prostate cancer diagnoses have subsequently changed in a racially diverse patient population is not well defined. In this study, we aim to determine the impact of the USPSTF screening recommendation in the Hennepin Healthcare System (HHS) in the state of Minnesota. Methods: A single-institution retrospective analysis of data from our electronic health record, to identify the characteristics of PSA screening and new prostate cancer diagnoses for men ≥50 years between 2008 and 2015. Data before and after May 2012 were compared. P-values were calculated using binominal and generalized linear models. Results: Nearly 22,000 patients underwent PSA screening from 2008 to 2015. PSA screening rates decreased after May 2012 for the four largest demographics represented (p < 0.001). Hispanics and Blacks were more likely to be screened when compared to Whites and Asians (p < 0.05). 319 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed from 2008 to 2015 with 87 cases (27.3%) diagnosed by PSA-screening. The number needed to screen to diagnose one patient with prostate cancer at HHS was 137.5, and 9.5% of patients (1146 patients) had a false positive PSA that led to further testing or a biopsy. $56,090 was spent in screening costs per diagnosis of early stage prostate cancer via screening. Patients diagnosed from screening were less likely to present with high Gleason scores (8-10) compared to non-screening diagnosis (8% vs 23.3%, p < 0.01). The 5-year survival percentage (prostate cancer mortality) was improved for those patients diagnosed by PSA screening vs the non-screened group (100% vs 89.3%, p < 0.05). Conclusions: PSA screening has declined at HHS since the USPSTF recommendation against prostate cancer screening. Implementation of PSA screening in our healthcare system is expensive and leads to a high number of false positives. Despite this, the 5-year survival from prostate cancer is significantly higher when patients are diagnosed by PSA screening.

Impact of USPSTF recommendations on utilization of PSA screening in Medicare beneficiaries.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 166-166
Author(s):  
Rahul Ramesh Khairnar ◽  
Mark Mishra ◽  
Ebere Onukwugha
Keyword(s):  
Task Force ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Administrative Claims ◽  
Medicare Beneficiaries ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
The Impact

166 Background: Previous studies assessing the impact of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on utilization of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening have not investigated longer-term impacts of the 2008 recommendations nor have they investigated the impact of the 2012 recommendations in the Medicare population. The study aim was to evaluate change in utilization of PSA screening, post USPSTF recommendations of 2008 and 2012, and to assess trends and determinants of receipt of PSA screening in the Medicare population. Methods: This retrospective study of male Medicare beneficiaries utilized Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) data and linked administrative claims from 2006-2013. Beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, with continuous enrollment in Parts A and B for each year they were surveyed were included in the study cohort. Beneficiaries with self-reported or claims-based diagnosis of prostate cancer were excluded. Beneficiaries with Medicare eligibility due to end stage renal disease or disability were also excluded. The primary outcome was receipt of PSA screening. Other measures include age groups (65-74 and ≥75), time periods (pre- and post-2008 and 2012 recommendations), and sociodemographic variables. Results: The study cohort consisted of 11,028 beneficiaries, who were predominantly white (87.56%), married (69.25%), and unemployed (84.4%); 52.21% beneficiaries were aged ≥75. Declining utilization trends for PSA screening were observed only in men aged ≥75 after 2008 recommendations and in both age groups after 2012 recommendations. The odds of receiving PSA screening declined by 17% percent in men aged ≥75 after the 2008 recommendations and by 29% in men aged ≥65 after the 2012 recommendations. Conclusions: The USPSTF recommendations of 2008 and 2012 against PSA screening were associated with declines in utilization of PSA screening during the study period. USPSTF recommendations play a significant role in affecting utilization patterns of health services. Future studies should evaluate if the proposed 2017 update to these recommendations advocating shared decision-making for PSA screening in men aged 55-69 increase utilization in this age-group.

Prostate cancer screening patterns among LGBT populations.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19077-e19077
Author(s):  
Sung Jun Ma ◽  
Oluwadamilola Temilade Oladeru ◽  
Joseph Miccio ◽  
Katy Wang ◽  
Kristopher Attwood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Weighted Estimate ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Lgbt Populations ◽  
Do So

e19077 Background: More than 10 million Americans identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT), and the majority of male-to-female (MTF) transgender individuals still have prostates even after surgical transitions. Guidelines on prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening for LGBT populations are limited, and informed and shared decision making are encouraged by various organizations. However, patterns of care for PSA screening in LGBT populations remains unclear. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a cross sectional study to evaluate self-reported PSA screening and decision making among LGBT populations. Methods: The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System database was queried for LGBT adults from 2014-2016 and 2018. Those with prior prostate cancer were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association of LGBT status with PSA screening, informed and shared decision making, after adjusting for demographic characteristics and survey weights. Results: A total of 164,370 participants were eligible for PSA screening (n = 156,548 for cisgender [CG]+straight, n = 156 for MTF+straight, n = 33 for MTF+gay, n = 52 for MTF+bisexual, n = 51 for MTF+other sexual orientation [SO], n = 3354 for CG+gay, n = 1641 for CG+bisexual, n = 2535 for CG+other SO), representing a weighted estimate of 1.2 million LGBT populations. When compared to CG+straight, CG+gay/bisexual cohorts were more likely to undergo PSA screening within the past 2 years (CG+gay: OR 1.08, p < 0.001; CG+bisexual: OR 1.06, p < 0.001), have ever received PSA screening (CG+gay: OR 1.30, p < 0.001; CG+bisexual: OR 1.12, p < 0.001), and be recommended for PSA screening by their physicians (CG+gay and bisexual: OR 1.16, p < 0.001). All other cohorts were less likely to do so (all OR < 1, p < 0.05). MTF+gay and CG+gay participants were more likely to make informed decision (MTF+gay: OR 3.13, p < 0.001; CG+gay: OR 1.09, p < 0.001), while all other cohorts were less likely to do so (all OR < 1, p < 0.05). CG+gay participants were also more likely to share decision (OR 2.51, p < 0.001), while there were no associations for all other cohorts (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: Select gay populations were more likely to undertake PSA screening recommended by their physicians and participate in informed and shared decision making. However, other LGBT populations were less likely to make informed decisions, and transgender participants were less likely to undergo PSA screening. Further research efforts are needed to improve informed and shared decision making for PSA screening in such underserved population.

scholarly journals Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e025470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin W M Vernooij ◽  
Lyubov Lytvyn ◽  
Hector Pardo-Hernandez ◽  
Loai Albarqouni ◽  
Carlos Canelo-Aybar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Prostate Cancer Mortality ◽  
Psa Screening

ObjectivesTo investigate men’s values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.Eligibility criteriaPrimary studies of men’s values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.ResultsWe identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37% when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44% when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.ConclusionThe variability of men’s values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.Trial registration numberCRD42018095585.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document