Physician visits prior to treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer Journal Article


Authors: Jang, T. L.; Bekelman, J. E.; Liu, Y.; Bach, P. B.; Basch, E. M.; Elkin, E. B.; Zelefsky, M. J.; Scardino, P. T.; Begg, C. B.; Schrag, D.
Article Title: Physician visits prior to treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer
Abstract: Background: The 2 primary therapeutic interventions for localized prostate cancer are delivered by different types of physicians, urologists, and radiation oncologists. We evaluated how visits to specialists and primary care physicians (PCPs) by men with localized prostate cancer are related to treatment choice. Methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database, we identified 85 088 men with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed at age 65 years or older, between 1994 and 2002. Menwere categorized by primary treatment received within 9 months of diagnosis: radical prostatectomy (n=18 201 [21%]), radiotherapy (n=35 925 [42%]), androgen deprivation (n=14 021 [17%]), or expectant management (n=16 941 [20%]). Visits to specialists and PCPs were analyzed by patient characteristics and primary therapies received and were identified using Medicare claims and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. Results: Overall, 42 309 men (50%) were seen exclusively by urologists, 37 540 (44%) by urologists and radiation oncologists, 2329 (3%) by urologists and medical oncologists, and 2910 (3%) by all 3 specialists. There was a strong association between the type of specialist seen and primary therapy received. Visits to PCPs were infrequent between diagnosis and receipt of therapy (22% of patients visited any PCP and 17% visited an established PCP) and were not associated with a greater likelihood of specialist visits. Irrespective of age, comorbidity status, or specialist visits, men seen by PCPs were more likely to be treated expectantly. Conclusions: Specialist visits relate strongly to prostate cancer treatment choices. In light of these findings, prior evidence that specialists prefer the modality they themselves deliver and the lack of conclusive comparative studies demonstrating superiority of one modality over another, it is essential to ensure that men have access to balanced information before choosing a particular therapy for prostate cancer. ©2010 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Keywords: aged; aged, 80 and over; major clinical study; cancer localization; multimodality cancer therapy; united states; cancer radiotherapy; research design; cancer staging; methodology; neoplasm staging; clinical practice; physician's practice patterns; statistics; logistic models; risk factors; health survey; pathology; oncology; cancer therapy; risk factor; prostate cancer; prostatic neoplasms; medicare; confounding factors (epidemiology); radiation oncology; prostatectomy; prostate tumor; urology; clinical evaluation; comorbidity; androgen antagonists; ambulatory care; medical oncology; referral and consultation; medical specialist; cancer registry; seer program; hospital admission; antiandrogen; epidemiology; general practitioner; decision making; analysis of variance; androgen deprivation therapy; statistical model; primary medical care; choice behavior; family practice; patient referral; physicians, family; manpower; general practice; office visits
Journal Title: Archives of Internal Medicine
Volume: 170
Issue: 5
ISSN: 0003-9926
Publisher: American Medical Association  
Date Published: 2010-03-08
Start Page: 440
End Page: 450
Language: English
DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.1
PUBMED: 20212180
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC4251764
DOI/URL:
Notes: --- - "Cited By (since 1996): 7" - "Export Date: 20 April 2011" - "CODEN: AIMDA" - "Source: Scopus"
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Michael J Zelefsky
    754 Zelefsky
  2. Colin B Begg
    306 Begg
  3. Peter T Scardino
    671 Scardino
  4. Ethan Martin Basch
    180 Basch
  5. Yihai Liu
    5 Liu
  6. Deborah Schrag
    229 Schrag
  7. Thomas Lee Jang
    14 Jang
  8. Elena B Elkin
    163 Elkin
  9. Peter Bach
    255 Bach