Trends and variation in prostate cancer diagnosis via transperineal biopsy in Australia and New Zealand.


Journal

Urologic oncology
ISSN: 1873-2496
Titre abrégé: Urol Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9805460

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2023
Historique:
received: 14 12 2022
revised: 05 04 2023
accepted: 12 05 2023
medline: 19 6 2023
pubmed: 1 6 2023
entrez: 31 5 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To describe changes in the use of prostate biopsy techniques among men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Australia and New Zealand and examine factors associated with these changes. We extracted data between 2015 and 2019 from 7 jurisdictions of the Australia and New Zealand Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (PCOR-ANZ). Distribution and time trend of transrectal (TR) vs. transperineal (TP) biopsy type, differences in the proportion of biopsy type by geographic jurisdiction, diagnosing institute characteristics (public vs. private, metropolitan vs. regional, case volume) and patient characteristics such as socio-economic status (SES), and location of residence were analyzed. We analyzed data from 37,638 patients. The overall proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed by TP increased from 26% to 57% between 2015 and 2019. Patients living in a major city, a more socioeconomically advantaged area or who were diagnosed in a metropolitan or private hospital were more likely to have TP than TR. While all subgroups were observed to increase their use of TP over the study period, uptake grew faster for men from low SES areas and those diagnosed at a regional or low-volume hospital but slower for men living in outer regional/remote areas or treated at a public hospital. In this binational registry, prostate cancer is now more commonly diagnosed by TP than the TR approach. While the gap between uptakes of TP has diminished for patients with low vs. high SES, disparity has widened for patients from outer regional areas vs major cities and public vs. private hospitals.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
To describe changes in the use of prostate biopsy techniques among men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Australia and New Zealand and examine factors associated with these changes.
METHODS
We extracted data between 2015 and 2019 from 7 jurisdictions of the Australia and New Zealand Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (PCOR-ANZ). Distribution and time trend of transrectal (TR) vs. transperineal (TP) biopsy type, differences in the proportion of biopsy type by geographic jurisdiction, diagnosing institute characteristics (public vs. private, metropolitan vs. regional, case volume) and patient characteristics such as socio-economic status (SES), and location of residence were analyzed.
RESULTS
We analyzed data from 37,638 patients. The overall proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed by TP increased from 26% to 57% between 2015 and 2019. Patients living in a major city, a more socioeconomically advantaged area or who were diagnosed in a metropolitan or private hospital were more likely to have TP than TR. While all subgroups were observed to increase their use of TP over the study period, uptake grew faster for men from low SES areas and those diagnosed at a regional or low-volume hospital but slower for men living in outer regional/remote areas or treated at a public hospital.
CONCLUSIONS
In this binational registry, prostate cancer is now more commonly diagnosed by TP than the TR approach. While the gap between uptakes of TP has diminished for patients with low vs. high SES, disparity has widened for patients from outer regional areas vs major cities and public vs. private hospitals.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37258371
pii: S1078-1439(23)00186-2
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.05.011
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

324.e13-324.e20

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Auteurs

Michael E O' Callaghan (ME)

Urology Unit, Flinders Medical Centre, South Australia, Australia; College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia; Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Electronic address: Michael.ocallaghan@health.sa.gov.au.

Matthew Roberts (M)

Department of Urology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Queensland, Australia; University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, Queensland, Australia.

Jeremy Grummet (J)

Alfred Health, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Victoria, Australia; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.

Stephen Mark (S)

Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Daniel Gilbourd (D)

Department of Urology, The Canberra Hospital, Australian Capital Territory, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Mark Frydenberg (M)

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Australian Urology Associates, Melbourne, Australia.

Jeremy Millar (J)

Alfred Health and School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Nathan Papa (N)

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH