Updated Trends in Imaging Use in Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer

Published in: Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, v. 17, no. 3, Sep. 2014, p. 246-251

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2014

by Sima P. Porten, Alexandria Smith, Anobel Y. Odisho, Mark Litwin, Christopher S. Saigal, Peter R. Carroll, Matthew R. Cooperberg

Read More

Access further information on this document at Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

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

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have found persistent overuse of imaging for clinical staging of men with low-risk prostate cancer. We aimed to determine imaging trends in three cohorts of men. METHODS: We analyzed imaging trends of men with prostate cancer who were a part of Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) (1998–2006), were insured by Medicare (1998–2006), or privately insured (Ingenix database, 2002–2006). The rates of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and bone scan (BS) were determined and time trends were analyzed by linear regression. For men in CaPSURE, demographic and clinical predictors of test use were explored using a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: Since 1998, there was a significant downward trend in BS (16%) use in the CaPSURE cohort (N=5156). There were slight downward trends (2.4 and 1.7%, respectively) in the use of CT and MRI. Among 54 322 Medicare patients, BS, CT and MRI use increased by 2.1, 10.8 and 2.2% and among 16 161 privately insured patients, use increased by 7.9, 8.9 and 3.7%, respectively. In CaPSURE, the use of any imaging test was greater in men with higher-risk disease. In addition, type of insurance and treatment affected the use of imaging tests in this population. CONCLUSIONS: There is widespread misuse of imaging tests in men with low-risk prostate cancer, particularly for CT. These findings highlight the need for examination of factors that drive decision making with respect to imaging in this setting.

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 www.rand.org/about/principles.

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.