4.5 Article

Racial disparity in the utilization of multiparametric MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer

期刊

PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 567-572

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41391-020-0223-5

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Black men have significantly higher incidence and are up to three times more likely to die of prostate cancer (PCa) than White men. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy (FBx) has emerged as a promising modality for the detection of PCa. The goal of our study is to identify differences in utilization of FBx between Black and White men presenting with suspicion of PCa. Methods We performed a retrospective review of Black and White men who presented with suspicion of PCa and required biopsy from January 2014 to December 2018. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was done to study the influence of race on the utilization of FBx. Results Six hundred nineteen (Black: 182, White: 437) men were included in the study. Forty-one out of 182 (22.5%) Black men underwent FBx compared with 225/437 (51.5%) of White men (P < 0.001). After adjusting for age, race, prostate-specific antigen level, digital rectal exam, family history of PCa and health insurance provider, Black race was found to be a significant negative predictor of obtaining FBx (OR:0.32, 95% CI: 0.21-0.51, P < 0.001). Black race stayed an independent negative predictor (OR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.20-0.64, P < 0.001) in the cohort of patients who were biopsy naive; however, although reduced, there was no significant difference in the cohort with a prior negative biopsy (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.19-1.36, P = 0.179). Conclusions Although FBx is a superior modality for early detection of PCa, we found that Black men were less likely to undergo FBx when presenting with PCa suspicion. Further investigation is needed to evaluate if this difference is patient preference or if there are underlying socioeconomic, cultural or provider biases influencing this disparity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据