Cancer medicine · 2025
Outcomes of Novel Hormonal Therapies in Men With Advanced Prostate Cancer by Treating Specialist.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Faraj Kassem S, Oerline Mary, Kaufman Samuel, Maganty Avinash, Caram Megan E V, Shahinian Vahakn B, Hollenbeck Brent K
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: In the past decade, the management of advanced prostate cancer has shifted to novel hormonal therapies. As a result, urologists have increased their involvement in the management of advanced prostate cancer. These therapies require close monitoring due to the possibility of adverse cardiometabolic events. We assessed outcomes among men diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer started on novel hormonal therapy by a urologist compared to those by a medical oncologist.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with advanced prostate cancer treated with a novel hormonal therapy between 2012 and 2019. The primary outcome was an adverse event comprised of a hospital visit for a cardiometabolic event within 6 months of starting a novel hormonal therapy. Secondary outcomes included monthly out-of-pocket costs and treatment adherence.
RESULTS: There were 1212 (23%) and 4124 (77%) patients who were prescribed a novel hormonal therapy for the first time by a urologist and medical oncologist, respectively. No difference in the composite adverse event measure was observed in those managed by urologists or medical oncologists (4.2% vs. 4.7%, respectively, p = 0.49). Out-of-pocket costs, in men without low-income subsidies, did not vary by specialty ($772 vs. $790, p = 0.58). Adherence to treatment did not vary in men managed by urologists or medical oncologists (75% vs. 74%, respectively, p = 0.64).
CONCLUSIONS: The specialty of the physician prescribing a novel hormonal therapy was not associated with the risk of a cardiometabolic adverse event. Further, management by a urologist did not adversely affect costs to patients or adherence.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with advanced prostate cancer treated with a novel hormonal therapy between 2012 and 2019. The primary outcome was an adverse event comprised of a hospital visit for a cardiometabolic event within 6 months of starting a novel hormonal therapy. Secondary outcomes included monthly out-of-pocket costs and treatment adherence.
RESULTS: There were 1212 (23%) and 4124 (77%) patients who were prescribed a novel hormonal therapy for the first time by a urologist and medical oncologist, respectively. No difference in the composite adverse event measure was observed in those managed by urologists or medical oncologists (4.2% vs. 4.7%, respectively, p = 0.49). Out-of-pocket costs, in men without low-income subsidies, did not vary by specialty ($772 vs. $790, p = 0.58). Adherence to treatment did not vary in men managed by urologists or medical oncologists (75% vs. 74%, respectively, p = 0.64).
CONCLUSIONS: The specialty of the physician prescribing a novel hormonal therapy was not associated with the risk of a cardiometabolic adverse event. Further, management by a urologist did not adversely affect costs to patients or adherence.