Jialin Mao, Jeanine M Genkinger, Andrew G Rundle, Jason D Wright, Tabassum Z Insaf, Maria J Schymura, Jim C Hu, Parisa Tehranifar
{"title":"Racial and ethnic disparities in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: testing the physician-level segregated and differential treatment hypotheses.","authors":"Jialin Mao, Jeanine M Genkinger, Andrew G Rundle, Jason D Wright, Tabassum Z Insaf, Maria J Schymura, Jim C Hu, Parisa Tehranifar","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkae061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mechanisms underlying racial and ethnic disparities in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP) are unclear. We sought to test 2 physician-level hypotheses: 1) Segregated Treatment and 2) Differential Treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational study used the New York State Cancer Registry linked to discharge records and included patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018. For hypothesis 1, we examined the association between patient race and ethnicity and treating surgeon RARP use (high-use surgeons, low-use surgeons, and surgeons at non-RARP facilities). For hypothesis 2, we determined the association between patient race and ethnicity and receipt of RARP when matching on treating surgeon, age, year of procedure, and Gleason group. We explored the role of insurance in both analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 18 926 patients (8.0% Hispanic, 16.9% non-Hispanic Black, 75.1% non-Hispanic White), with a mean age of 60.4 ± 7.1 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds of being treated by low-RARP-use surgeons (odds ratio [OR] = 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 3.88; OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.94, respectively) and by surgeons at non-RARP facilities (OR = 4.19, 95% CI = 2.18 to 8.07; OR = 4.60, 95% CI = 2.58 to 8.23, respectively). In the matched cohorts, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive RARP than non-Hispanic White patients (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.98; OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.00, respectively). These associations were partially attenuated after accounting for insurance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Racial and ethnic disparities in RARP use are related to patients being treated by different surgeons and treated differently by the same surgeons. Identifying and addressing multilevel barriers to equitable surgical treatment is needed to reduce disparities among prostate cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11340640/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkae061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Mechanisms underlying racial and ethnic disparities in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP) are unclear. We sought to test 2 physician-level hypotheses: 1) Segregated Treatment and 2) Differential Treatment.
Methods: This observational study used the New York State Cancer Registry linked to discharge records and included patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018. For hypothesis 1, we examined the association between patient race and ethnicity and treating surgeon RARP use (high-use surgeons, low-use surgeons, and surgeons at non-RARP facilities). For hypothesis 2, we determined the association between patient race and ethnicity and receipt of RARP when matching on treating surgeon, age, year of procedure, and Gleason group. We explored the role of insurance in both analyses.
Results: This study included 18 926 patients (8.0% Hispanic, 16.9% non-Hispanic Black, 75.1% non-Hispanic White), with a mean age of 60.4 ± 7.1 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds of being treated by low-RARP-use surgeons (odds ratio [OR] = 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 3.88; OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.94, respectively) and by surgeons at non-RARP facilities (OR = 4.19, 95% CI = 2.18 to 8.07; OR = 4.60, 95% CI = 2.58 to 8.23, respectively). In the matched cohorts, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive RARP than non-Hispanic White patients (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.98; OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.00, respectively). These associations were partially attenuated after accounting for insurance.
Conclusions: Racial and ethnic disparities in RARP use are related to patients being treated by different surgeons and treated differently by the same surgeons. Identifying and addressing multilevel barriers to equitable surgical treatment is needed to reduce disparities among prostate cancer patients.