The following is a summary of “Characteristics of prostate cancer patients captured by facility-based versus geography-based cancer registries,” published in the July 2023 issue of the Urologic Oncology by Modi et al.

Based on eligibility for a facility-based cancer registry system, researchers determined differences in the demographics, tumor factors, and treatment patterns of prostate cancer patients in a geographically-based cancer registry. From 2018 to 2019, they identified prostate cancer patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Their exposure was receiving cancer treatment at a facility accredited by the Commission on Cancer (CoC) of the American College of Surgeons, thereby qualifying for inclusion in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). 

The outcomes included patient demographics, tumor factors (histology grade), and radical prostatectomy treatment. They identified 113,733 patients with prostate cancer, of whom 65,708 (57%) were NCDB-eligible with an analytical abstract and 11,010 (10%) were NCDB-eligible without an analytical abstract. NCDB-eligible men were younger (67.0 vs. 68.1 years, P<0.001), less likely to be Hispanic/Latino (8.7% vs. 13.2%, P<0.001), and more likely to reside in a county with a median income of $75,000 or more (40.9% vs. 30.0%, P<0.001). The percentage of registries eligible for the NCDB ranged from 95.9% in Connecticut to 42.6% in Utah. NCDB-ineligible patients were more likely to have an unknown stage (17.2% versus 2.9%) and absent PSA (22.9% versus 9.3%). 

On biopsy, men eligible for the NCDB were significantly less likely to have Grade Group 1 cancer (28.2% vs 39.2%, P<0.001). In NCDB-eligible patients, prostatectomy was more prevalent for both low-risk (19.6% vs. 8.8%, adjusted OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.72–6.66) and high-risk (43.5% vs. 26.0%, adjusted OR 1.95) malignancies. Compared to NCDB-ineligible patients, NCDB-eligible patients differ significantly in demographics, eligibility for active surveillance, and treatment patterns. Regarding epidemiologic trends, practice patterns, and outcomes for this population, generalizations should be interpreted cautiously.

Source: sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S107814392300128X