ArticleUrology2021
Patient-reported Health Status, Comorbidity Burden, and Prostate Cancer Treatment.
Article in Urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimating patient health in prostate cancer treatment counseling.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2023Article
- Using health insurance claims data to assess long-term disease progression in a prostate cancer cohort.The Prostate · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether patient-reported health status, more so than comorbidity, influences treatment in men with localized prostate cancer.
methodsUsing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data linked with Medicare claims and CAHPS surveys, we identified men aged 65-84 diagnosed with localized prostate cancer from 2004 to 2013 and ascertained their National Cancer Institute (NCI) comorbidity score and patient-reported health status. Adjusting for demographics and cancer risk, we examined the relationship between these measures and treatment for the overall cohort, low-risk men aged 65-74, intermediate/high-risk men aged 65-74, and men aged 75-84.
resultsAmong 2724 men, 43.0% rated their overall health as Excellent/Very Good, while 62.7% had a comorbidity score of 0. Beyond age and cancer risk, patient-reported health status was significantly associated with treatment. Compared to men reporting Excellent/Very Good health, men in Poor/Fair health less often received treatment (odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.90). Younger men with intermediate/high-risk cancer in Good (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.88) or Fair/Poor (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.79) health less often underwent prostatectomy vs radiation compared to men in Excellent/Very Good health. In contrast, men with NCI comorbidity score of 1 more often received treatment (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11-1.70) compared to men with NCI comorbidity score of 0.
conclusionPatient-reported health status drives treatment for prostate cancer in an appropriate direction whereas comorbidity has an inconsistent relationship. Greater understanding of this interplay between subjective and empiric assessments may facilitate more shared decision-making in prostate cancer care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.