Abstract
AbstractBackgroundTreatment decisions for men diagnosed with prostate cancer depend on a range of clinical and patient characteristics such as disease stage, age, general health, risk of side effects and access. Associations between treatment patterns and area-level factors such as remoteness and socioeconomic disadvantage have been observed in many countries but have not been investigated in Australia.MethodsHospital separations data for interventional treatments for prostate cancer (radical prostatectomy, low dose rate and high dose rate brachytherapy) were modelled using spatial models, generalised linear mixed models, maximised excess events tests andk-means statistical clustering.ResultsGeographic differences in population rates of interventional treatments were found (p<0.001). Separation rates for radical prostatectomy were lower in remote areas (12.2 per 10 000 person-years compared with 15.0-15.9 in regional and major city areas). Rates for all treatments decreased with increasing socioeconomic disadvantage (radical prostatectomy 19.1 /10 000 person-years in the most advantaged areas compared with 12.9 in the most disadvantaged areas). Three groups of similar areas were identified: those with higher rates of radical prostatectomy, those with higher rates of low dose brachytherapy, and those with low interventional treatment rates but higher rates of excess deaths. The most disadvantaged areas and remote areas tended to be in the latter group.ConclusionsThe geographic differences in treatment rates may partly reflect differences in patients’ physical and financial access to treatments. Treatment rates also depend on diagnosis rates and thus reflect variation in investigation rates for prostate cancer and presentation of disease. Spatial variation in interventional treatments may aid identification of areas of under-treatment or over-treatment.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference30 articles.
1. Australian Cancer Atlas (https://atlas.cancer.org.au). Cancer Council Queensland, Queensland University of Technology, Cooperative Research Centre for Spatial Information. 2018. xVersion 09-2018.
2. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare. First Australian Atlas of Healthcare Variation. 2015. https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/our-work/healthcare-variation/atlas-2015.
3. Geographical Variations in Prostate Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review of International Evidence;Front Oncol,2019
4. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer—2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent