Patterns of Care for Men with Prostate Cancer After Failure of Primary Treatment

Published in: Cancer, v. 107, no. 2, July 15, 2006, p. 258-265

by Tracey L. Krupski, Christopher S. Saigal, Janet M. Hanley, Matthias Schonlau, Mark Litwin

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine trends in patterns of care after failure of primary prostate cancer treatment and to determine whether nonclinical factors influenced the receipt of secondary treatment. METHODS: The authors identified individuals treated for nonmetastatic prostate cancer in the years 1991-1999 from the linked databases of Medicare and the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. The outcome of interest was receipt of secondary therapy. They performed Cox proportional hazard analyses to investigate the link between demographic and clinical characteristics and the likelihood of receiving secondary treatment after either surgery or radiation. RESULTS: Of 65,716 subjects who met our inclusion criteria, 10,200 (15%) received some form of secondary therapy. For men undergoing initial surgical or radiation therapy, tumor grade, year of diagnosis, and geographic region were associated with secondary therapy. No socioeconomic factors such as education, ethnicity, or income level were associated with secondary therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of care after primary prostate cancer therapy continue to vary regionally. Standardized clinical algorithms and utilization of prostate-specific antigen testing appear to have influenced secondary therapy rates.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.