Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author: Jason Hu x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Jason Hu, Armen G. Aprikian, Marie Vanhuyse, and Alice Dragomir

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a cornerstone of treatment for advanced prostate cancer (PCa); however, it accelerates the loss of bone mineral density (BMD), which increases fracture risk. Guidelines recommend BMD testing when initiating ADT to assess baseline fracture risk properly. The objective of this study was to examine the proportion of BMD testing in men initiating ADT in Quebec and to identify factors associated with receipt of this testing. Methods: The study cohort consisted of men extracted from Quebec public healthcare insurance administrative databases who initiated continuous ADT from 2000 to 2015 for >12 months. The primary study outcome was receipt of BMD testing in the period from 6 months before through 12 months after ADT initiation. Multivariable generalized linear mixed regression modeling with a logit link was performed to identify variables associated with BMD testing. Results: We identified 22,033 patients, of whom 3,910 (17.8%) underwent BMD testing. Rates of BMD testing increased from 4.1% in 2000 to 23.4% in 2015. After multivariable analyses, prior history of osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR], 1.84; 95% CI, 1.32–2.57; P<.001), rheumatoid arthritis (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.15–2.34; P=.006), use of bisphosphonates (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.25–1.73; P<.001), and long-term corticosteroid use (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.15–2.31; P=.006) were associated with higher odds of BMD testing. Patient age >80 years (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59–0.76; P<.001), metastases (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70–0.89; P<.001), higher Charlson comorbidity score (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51–0.81; P<.001), and rural residence (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68–0.87; P<.001) were associated with lower odds of BMD testing. Conclusions: In our study population, BMD testing rates in men initiating ADT were low, although they increased over the years especially in the years after the publication of recommendations for BMD testing in these patients. Potential gaps identified include being older, more comorbid, and rural areas. Overall, additional efforts emphasizing the importance of BMD testing in PCa guidelines may be needed.

Full access

Alice Dragomir, Nawar Touma, Jason Hu, Sylvie Perreault, and Armen G. Aprikian

Background: Controversy exists regarding the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with prostate cancer. We sought to evaluate the association between gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists versus GnRH antagonist and the risk of CVD in patients with prostate cancer with or without prior CVD. Patients and Methods: Using administrative databases from Quebec, Canada, we identified first-time GnRH agonists and antagonist (degarelix) users between January 2012 and June 2016. Follow-up ended at the earliest of the following: first CVD event (myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, ischemic heart disease [IHD], arrhythmia, and heart failure [HF]); switch of GnRH group; death; or December 31, 2016. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score was used to control for potential confounding. IPTW-Cox proportional hazards model accounting for competing risks was used to evaluate the association of interest. Results: Among 10,785 patients identified, 10,201 and 584 were on GnRH agonists and antagonist, respectively. Median age was 75 years (interquartile range, 69–81 years) for both groups. A total of 4,152 (40.7%) men in the GnRH agonists group and 281 (48.1%) men in the GnRH antagonist group had CVD in the 3-year period prior to ADT initiation. Risk of HF was decreased in the antagonist group compared with the GnRH agonist group among patients with prior CVD (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26–0.79). Risk of IHD was decreased in the antagonist group in patients without prior CVD (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11–0.65). Use of antagonist was associated with an increased risk of arrhythmia among patients with no prior CVD (HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.63–3.36). Conclusions: Compared with GnRH agonists, the GnRH antagonist was found to be associated with a decreased risk of HF, specifically among patients with prior CVD. Among those with no prior CVD, the GnRH antagonist was associated with a decreased risk of IHD but an increased risk of arrhythmia.

Full access

Ayal A. Aizer, Xiangmei Gu, Ming-Hui Chen, Toni K. Choueiri, Neil E. Martin, Jason A. Efstathiou, Andrew S. Hyatt, Powell L. Graham, Quoc-Dien Trinh, Jim C. Hu, and Paul L. Nguyen

Background: Evidence-based consensus guidelines recommend only observation for men with low-risk prostate cancer and life expectancy less than 10 years. This report describes the incidence, drivers, cost, and morbidity of overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer within the United States. Methods: The SEER-Medicare Program was used to identify 11,744 men aged 66 years or older diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer in 2004 through 2007. Overtreatment of prostate cancer was defined as definitive treatment of a patient with a life expectancy of less than 10 years. Expected survival was estimated using NCCN methodology. Costs were the amount paid by Medicare in years after minus year before diagnosis. Toxicities were relevant Medicare diagnoses/interventions. P values are 2-sided. Results: Of 3001 men with low-risk prostate cancer and a life expectancy of less than 10 years, 2011 men (67%) were overtreated. On multivariable logistic regression, overtreated men were more likely to be married (odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05–1.59; P=.02), reside in affluent regions (P<.001), and harbor more advanced disease at diagnosis (P<.001). Two-year toxicity was greater in overtreated patients (P<.001). Relative to active surveillance/watchful waiting/observation, the median additional cost per definitive treatment was $18,827 over 5 years; the cumulative annual cost attributable to overtreatment in the United States was $58.7 million. The ability to avoid treating the 80% of men with low-grade disease who will never die of prostate cancer would save $1.32 billion per year nationally. Conclusions: Overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer is partially driven by sociodemographic factors and occurs frequently, with marked impact on patient quality of life and health-related costs.

Full access

Ghadeer Olleik, Wassim Kassouf, Armen Aprikian, Jason Hu, Marie Vanhuyse, Fabio Cury, Stuart Peacock, Elin Bonnevier, Ebba Palenius, and Alice Dragomir

Background: Inaccurate risk classification and the burden of unnecessary biopsies are a challenge due to the limited ability of current risk assessment tools and modalities to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa) and distinguish indolent from aggressive disease. This systematic review assesses newly developed tests and interventions with high evidence of clinical utility that might be adopted in clinical practice during PCa management before initial and repeat biopsy, after positive biopsy, and after radical treatment. Methods: The Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies pertaining to the clinical utility of PCa diagnostic tests. Outcomes of interest were (1) a measure of the percentage of altered decision-making, (2) decrease in number of unnecessary biopsies, (3) decrease or increase in treatment intensity, and (4) risk reclassification after test results. Results: The search yielded 2,940 articles, of which 46 met the inclusion criteria. We found clinical utility evidence on the Prostate Health Index (PHI), 4Kscore test, MRI, OncotypeDX, Decipher test, Prolaris, ConfirmMDx, Progensa PCA3, NADiA ProsVue, and ProMark. No evidence was identified for Prostarix, ProstaVysion, Prostate Core Mitomic Test, and Mi-Prostate Score. The interventions demonstrated their clinical utility in terms of change in treatment recommendations, decrease/increase in interventional treatment, decrease in biopsy, and risk reclassification. At diagnosis after a positive biopsy, ProMark, OncotypeDX, Prolaris, and MRI guided the use of active surveillance. Use of NADiA ProsVue, Decipher, and Prolaris aided in the decision to add adjuvant therapy post-prostatectomy. PHI, 4Kscore, and MRI used prior initial and repeat biopsies, and ConfirmMDx and Progensa PCA3 used prior repeat biopsies to improve prediction of biopsy outcome, allowing a decrease in unnecessary biopsies. Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that implementation of these tests in clinical practice could effectuate personalized treatment of PCa. Further clinical and economic evaluation studies of long-term PCa outcomes are warranted to provide further guidance.