Comorbidity and the receipt of curative therapy for favorable-risk prostate cancer prior to and following the publication of PIVOT.

Abstract

17 Background: On July 19, 2012, the Prostate Cancer Intervention versus Observation Trial (PIVOT) was published and reported that after a median follow up of 10 years, radical prostatectomy neither improved overall survival nor reduced prostate cancer (PC)-specific mortality in men with low-risk PC compared to watchful waiting. However, the trial’s applicability may be somewhat limited by the participants’ poorer-than-average overall health. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the PIVOT by assessing practice patterns before and after its publication. Methods: Between October 1997 and May 2013, 6,818 men with low-risk (n = 5,081, 74.5%) or favorable intermediate-risk (N = 1,737, 25.5%) PC were treated with curative intent at the Chicago PC Foundation. We compared the proportions of these men with ≥2, 1, or 0 comorbid conditions, restricted to myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease. We assessed for a trend in these proportions by time tertile prior to the PIVOT’s publication and compared them one month following PIVOT to the final pre-publication time tertile. Results: Of 6,818 men treated with curative intent, 5,208 (76.5%), 1,307 (19.2%), and 293 (4.3%) had 0, 1, and ≥2 comorbidities, respectively. Prior to PIVOT, the proportion of men with the greatest comorbidity (≥2) increased by time tertile (3.5% vs. 4.2% vs. 5.4%; p = 0.002), while 1 month following publication, there was a decline in the proportion of men with the highest degree of comorbidity (5.4% vs. 2.9%; p = 0.05). In addition to the drop in men with greatest comorbidity, men treated following the publication of the PIVOT were also younger (median age 65.7 vs. 66.8 years; p = 0.04), more likely to be black or Hispanic (24.7% vs. 17.4%; p = 0.003), and more likely to have favorable intermediate than low-risk PC (36.1% vs. 28.4%; p = 0.007). Conclusions: Following the publication of the PIVOT, men with low or favorable intermediate-risk PC whose health was poorer than the national average were less likely to undergo curative treatment, whereas men at higher risk for harboring occult high grade PC despite favorable-risk indices were more likely to undergo curative treatment.