You have accessJournal of UrologyImaging/Radiology: Uroradiology (I)1 Apr 20132024 CONTEMPORARY TRENDS OF IMAGING AFTER PRIMARY TREATMENT FOR PROSTATE CANCER Sanoj Punnen, Sam Washington, Tranh Trang, Matthew Trusedale, Janet Cowan, Peter Carroll, and Matthew Cooperberg Sanoj PunnenSanoj Punnen San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , Sam WashingtonSam Washington San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , Tranh TrangTranh Trang San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , Matthew TrusedaleMatthew Trusedale San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , Janet CowanJanet Cowan San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , Peter CarrollPeter Carroll San Francisco, CA More articles by this author , and Matthew CooperbergMatthew Cooperberg San Francisco, CA More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.2443AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Previous studies have suggested an over-utilization of imaging in the diagnosis and assessment of newly diagnosed prostate cancer. However, data on utilization of imaging after the primary treatment for the disease are limited. We aimed to characterize trends in the use of imaging after prostate cancer treatment stratified by primary treatment type and time, and to identify patient characteristics associated with increased likelihood of receiving post treatment imaging. METHODS Patients in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) database with complete data on primary treatment and more then one year of follow up were selected for analysis. Imaging modalities assessed included radionuclide bone scan (BS), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) completed within 5 years of primary treatment or before any secondary treatments. Rates of postoperative imaging were compared by primary treatment modality and year of diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify characteristics significantly associated with receiving postoperative imaging. RESULTS 9,176 patients comprised the analytic cohort. Less then 10% of patients received imaging after primary prostate cancer treatment and this rate was consistent across years of diagnosis. The use of BS decreased over time while the rates of CT scans increased (p<0.01). Patients managed with active surveillance/watchful waiting (AS/WW) or primary androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) had a higher utilization of post treatment imaging, primarily with BS compared to patients treated by other modalities. Being managed with primary ADT (OR 4.66, 95% CI: 3.8-6.4; p-value <0.01) was associated with an increased likelihood of posttreatment imaging compared to surgery, while management with external beam radiotherapy (OR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.2-0.7; p-value <0.01) and brachytherapy (0.57, 95% CI: 0.4-0.9, p-value <0.01) was associated with a decreased likelihood of posttreatment imaging. In addition, receipt of pretreatment imaging was associated with a decreased likelihood of posttreatment imaging (OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.4-0.7, p-value <0.01). CONCLUSIONS Although the overall rates of imaging have remained stable over time, there has been a trend toward decreased BS and increased CT scans. Patients managed with primary ADT were more likely to receive imaging compared to patients managed with more definitive local therapy. These results do not address adequacy or appropriateness of imaging; optimal strategies for post-treatment imaging have yet to be defined. © 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 189Issue 4SApril 2013Page: e831 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2013 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Sanoj Punnen San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Sam Washington San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Tranh Trang San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Matthew Trusedale San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Janet Cowan San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Peter Carroll San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Matthew Cooperberg San Francisco, CA More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract