You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023PD10-01 ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN PROSTATE MRI AND GENOMIC TESTING AND TREATMENT INTENSIFICATION AMONG PATIENTS WITH LOCALIZED PROSTATE CANCER Michael Leapman, Rong Wang, Jessica Long, Preston Sprenkle, Xiaomei Ma, and Cary Gross Michael LeapmanMichael Leapman More articles by this author , Rong WangRong Wang More articles by this author , Jessica LongJessica Long More articles by this author , Preston SprenklePreston Sprenkle More articles by this author , Xiaomei MaXiaomei Ma More articles by this author , and Cary GrossCary Gross More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003250.01AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and tissue-based gene expression (genomic) tests improve local staging and estimates of disease prognosis, however clinical management associated with their use in the real-world setting is not well understood. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer in 2013-2017 and treated with prostate radiation or radical prostatectomy in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End-Results (SEER)-Medicare database. We identified prostate MRI and genomic tests using specific administrative claims codes. The primary study outcome was treatment intensification, defined as any use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate radiation or pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) for radical prostatectomy, respectively. We assessed the associations between patient-level receipt of prostate MRI and genomic testing and treatment intensification via multivariable logistic regressions, adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic factors, and further stratifying the analyses by D’Amico clinical risk status. RESULTS: We identified 26,017 patients meeting inclusion criteria, including 2,822 (11%) with low, 17,651 (68%) with intermediate and 4,664 (18%) with high-risk prostate cancer. In the overall cohort, receipt of prostate MRI (odds ratio [OR], 1.76 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.65-1.88, p<0.001) was associated with increased odds of treatment intensification, while genomic testing was not associated (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.01, p=0.07). Prostate MRI was associated with increased odds of intensified treatment in all risk strata, while genomic testing was associated with lower odds of intensified treatment in the high-risk subset only (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-1.00, p=0.048). By specific treatments, prostate MRI was associated with increased odds of PLND (OR 2.54, 95% CI 2.24-2.87) and ADT (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.26-1.48) across all risk strata, while genomic testing was associated with decreased odds of PLND (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.83) and ADT (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.76). This analysis is limited by the absence of MRI and genomic testing results. CONCLUSIONS: We identified distinct patterns of management associated with prostate MRI and genomic testing in localized prostate cancer. These findings suggest the need for additional information about the independent role of diagnostic technologies in decision-making. Source of Funding: William O. Seery Foundation, Patterson Trust Mentored Research AwardNIH/National Cancer Institute © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e326 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Michael Leapman More articles by this author Rong Wang More articles by this author Jessica Long More articles by this author Preston Sprenkle More articles by this author Xiaomei Ma More articles by this author Cary Gross More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract