4.4 Article

The effect of socioeconomic status, race, and insurance type on newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer in the United States (2004-2013)

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.10.023

关键词

Prostatic neoplasms; United States; Epidemiology; Neoplasm metastasis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, United States [5U01CA196390]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Understanding the characteristics of men who initially present with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) can better enable directed improvement initiatives. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and newly diagnosed mPCa. Materials Methods: All men diagnosed with PCa in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2013 were identified. Characteristics of men presenting with and without metastatic disease were compared. A 4-level composite metric of SES was created using Census-based income and education data. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between SES, race/ethnicity, and insurance and the risk of presenting with mPCa at the time of diagnosis. Results: Of 1,034,754 patients diagnosed with PCa, 4% had mPCa at initial presentation. Lower SES (first vs. fourth quartile; odds ratio [OR] = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.35-1.44), black and Hispanic race/ethnicity (vs. white; OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.43-1.51 and OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.17-1.28, respectively), and having Medicaid or no insurance (vs. Medicare or private; OR = 3.91, 95% CI: 3.78-4.05) were each independently associated with higher odds of presenting with mPCa after adjusting for all other covariates. Conclusions: Lower SES, race/ethnicity, and having Medicaid or no insurance were each independently associated with higher odds of presenting with metastases at the time of PCa diagnosis. Our findings may partially explain current PCa outcomes disparities and inform future efforts to reduce disparities. (c) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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