World journal of urology · 2025
Primary management of prostate cancer by universal health coverage effective coverage index.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Blas Leandro, Shiota Masaki, Onozawa Mizuki, Joung Jae Young, Koo Kyo Chul, Türkeri Levent, Şahin Bahadır, Lim Jasmine, Ong Teng Aik, Chiu Peter Ka-Fung, Ng Chi-Fai, Wu Tong-Lin, Le Chuyen Vu, Lojanapiwat Bannakij, Letran Jason L, Hakim Lukman, Chiong Edmund, Al-Edwan Ghazi M, Taguchi Satoru, Yamamoto Yoshiyuki, Sakamoto Shinichi, Kawai Taketo, Eto Masatoshi, Nakagawa Tohru, Hinotsu Shiro, Kume Haruki, Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP) study group
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Prostate cancer is under-researched in many Asian countries because the paucity of comprehensive cancer registries has prevented large studies from comparing primary prostate cancer therapies. We aimed to provide further insights into recent trends in primary prostate cancer management across multiple Asian countries and regions according to universal health coverage.
METHODS: This is part of the Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP), a prospective and multicenter study conducted in 12 Asian countries. The study cohort comprised patients newly diagnosed between January 2016 and December 2018. Patients were allocated to three categories according to the universal health coverage effective coverage index (Category 1 ≥ 80; Category 2, 70-79; and Category 3, < 70). We assessed primary management of prostate cancer according to these categories and by clinic pathological characteristics such as clinical stage, and D'Amico risk group.
RESULTS: In total, 34,994 patients were included in the final analysis. Category 1 had the highest proportion of patients diagnosed at early stages and Category 3 had the highest proportion of patients diagnosed at advanced stages. Most patients in Category 1 had undergone computed tomography scans, magnetic resonance imaging, and bone scans. In contrast, only 1.7% and 5.4% of men in Categories 2 and 3, respectively, had undergone all three of these investigations. The proportion of patients who had undergone radiation and androgen deprivation therapy as primary treatment was highest in Category 1, whereas the rate of conservative management was highest in Category 2. More patients in Category 3 than in the other two categories had undergone radical prostatectomy, but fewer had been treated with radiation therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlighted differences in patterns of treatment of newly diagnosed prostate cancer across 12 Asian countries and regions and suggest that, despite guidelines, health access affects treatment received.
METHODS: This is part of the Asian Prostate Cancer (A-CaP), a prospective and multicenter study conducted in 12 Asian countries. The study cohort comprised patients newly diagnosed between January 2016 and December 2018. Patients were allocated to three categories according to the universal health coverage effective coverage index (Category 1 ≥ 80; Category 2, 70-79; and Category 3, < 70). We assessed primary management of prostate cancer according to these categories and by clinic pathological characteristics such as clinical stage, and D'Amico risk group.
RESULTS: In total, 34,994 patients were included in the final analysis. Category 1 had the highest proportion of patients diagnosed at early stages and Category 3 had the highest proportion of patients diagnosed at advanced stages. Most patients in Category 1 had undergone computed tomography scans, magnetic resonance imaging, and bone scans. In contrast, only 1.7% and 5.4% of men in Categories 2 and 3, respectively, had undergone all three of these investigations. The proportion of patients who had undergone radiation and androgen deprivation therapy as primary treatment was highest in Category 1, whereas the rate of conservative management was highest in Category 2. More patients in Category 3 than in the other two categories had undergone radical prostatectomy, but fewer had been treated with radiation therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlighted differences in patterns of treatment of newly diagnosed prostate cancer across 12 Asian countries and regions and suggest that, despite guidelines, health access affects treatment received.