Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To test the effect of race/ethnicity on Social Security Administration (SSA) life tables’ life expectancy (LE) predictions in localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients treated with either radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). We hypothesized that LE will be affected by race/ethnicity.
Patients and Methods
We relied on the 2004–2006 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database to identify D’Amico intermediate- and high-risk PCa patients treated with either RP or EBRT. SSA life tables were used to compute 10-year LE predictions and were compared to OS. Stratification was performed according to treatment type (RP/EBRT) and race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian).
Results
Of 55,383 assessable patients, 40,490 were non-Hispanic White (RP 49.3% vs. EBRT 50.7%), 7194 non-Hispanic Black (RP 41.3% vs. EBRT 50.7%), 4716 Hispanic/Latino (RP 51.0% vs. EBRT 49.0%) and 2983 were Asian (RP 41.6% vs. EBRT 58.4%). In both RP and EBRT patients, OS exceeded life tables’ LE predictions, except for non-Hispanic Blacks. However, in RP patients, the magnitude of the difference was greater than in EBRT. Moreover, in RP patients, OS of non-Hispanic Blacks virtually perfectly followed predicted LE. Conversely, in EBRT patients, the OS of non-Hispanic Black patients was worse than predicted LE.
Conclusions
When comparing SEER-derived observed OS with SSA life table–derived predicted life expectancy, we recorded a survival disadvantage in non-Hispanic Black RP and EBRT patients, which was not the case in the three other races/ethnicities (non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanic/Latinos, and Asians). This discrepancy should ideally be confirmed within different registries, countries, and tumor entities. Furthermore, the source of these discrepant survival outcomes should be investigated and addressed by health care politics.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Sociology and Political Science,Anthropology,Health (social science)
Reference34 articles.
1. European Association of Urology: EAU Guidelines. Edition presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam 2020. ISBN 978–94–92671–07–3, Available from: https://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/ (access date 9th August 2021)
2. Fontanella P, Benecchi L, Grasso A, et al. Decision-making tools in prostate cancer: from risk grouping to nomograms. Minerva Urol e Nefrol. 2017;69(6):556–66.
3. National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Clinical practice guidelines on prostate cancer (Version 2.2021 — February 17, 2021). Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf (access date 9th August 2021)
4. Social Security Administration: Actuarial Life Tables (Period Life Table, 2017). Available from: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html (access date 9th August 2021)
5. Preisser F, Bandini M, Mazzone E, et al. Validation of the Social Security Administration Life Tables (2004–2014) in localized prostate cancer patients within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5:807–14.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献