The Role of Phenotyping in Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a chronic pain syndrome identified by the presence of noninfectious pelvic or perineal pain lasting longer than 3 months. Current diagnoses and treatments for the syndrome solely depend on and target symptoms, respectively. Thus far, the mechanistic disturbances responsible for the pathogenesis of CP/CPPS have remained largely elusive and treatments, and therefore, continue to be ineffective. To move toward successful management and treatment of CP/CPPS, it is necessary to elicit the underlying biological mechanisms responsible for the syndrome. Therefore, a phenotyping system that is able to bridge the gap between current symptom-based diagnosis and future mechanistic approaches to diagnosis and treatment is needed. In this article, we examine current CP/CPPS phenotyping systems, analyze their utility, and make suggestions for changes in clinical approaches to the syndrome that would both promulgate a mechanistic understanding and advance treatment approaches

Impact of African–American race on presentation, treatment, and survival of head and neck cancer

To determine the associations between African American race and stage at diagnosis, receipt of definitive therapy, and cancer-specific mortality among patients with head and neck cancer. The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database was used to conduct a retrospective study on 34,437 patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer from 2007 to 2010. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were applied to determine the impact of race on cancer stage at presentation (metastatic vs. non-metastatic) and receipt of definitive treatment. Fine and Gray competing-risks regression modeled the association between race and head and neck cancer-specific mortality. African Americans were more likely to present with metastatic cancer compared to non-African Americans (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.76; CI 1.50–2.07; P<0.001). Among patients with non-metastatic disease, African Americans were less likely to receive definitive treatment (AOR 0.63; CI 0.55–0.72; P<0.001). After a median follow-up of 19months, African Americans with non-metastatic disease were found to have a higher risk of head and neck cancer specific mortality (AHR 1.19; 95% CI 1.09–1.29; P<0.001). African Americans with head and neck cancer are more likely to present with metastatic disease, less likely to be treated definitively, and are more likely to die from head and neck cancer. The unacceptably high rates of disparity found in this study should serve as immediate targets for urgent healthcare policy intervention

Health Insurance Affects Head and Neck Cancer Treatment Patterns and Outcomes

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of insurance coverage on stage of presentation, treatment, and survival of head and neck cancer (HNC). A retrospective study was conducted using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program to identify patients diagnosed with HNC. The primary variable of interest was insurance analyzed as a dichotomous variable: Patients were considered uninsured if they were classified as "uninsured" by SEER, whereas patients were considered insured if they were defined by SEER as "any Medicaid," "insured," or "insured/no specifics." The outcomes of interest were cancer stage at presentation (M0 vs M1), receipt of definitive treatment, and HNC-specific mortality (HNCSM). Multivariable logistic regression modeled the association between insurance status and stage at presentation, as well as between insurance status and receipt of definitive treatment, whereas HNCSM was modeled using Fine and Gray competing risks. Sensitivity logistic regression analysis was used to determine whether observed interactions remained significant by insurance type (privately insured, Medicaid, and uninsured). Patients without medical insurance were more likely to present with metastatic cancer (adjusted odds ratio, 1.60; P < .001), were more likely to not receive definitive treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; P < .001), and had a higher risk of HNCSM (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.20; P = .002). Sensitivity analyses showed that when results were stratified by insurance type, significant interactions remained for uninsured patients and patients with Medicaid. Uninsured patients and patients with Medicaid are more likely to present with metastatic disease, are more likely to not be treated definitively, and are at a higher risk of HNCSM. The treatment gap between Medicaid and private insurance observed in this study should serve as an immediate policy target for health care reform

Marital status and head and neck cancer outcomes

The objective of this study was to examine the effects of marital status on stage at presentation, receipt of treatment, and survival in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was used to analyze 51,272 patients who were diagnosed with HNC from 2007 to 2010. The impact of marital status on cancer stage at presentation, receipt of definitive treatment, and HNC-specific mortality (HNCSM) was determined using multivariable logistic and Fine and Gray competing-risks regression models, as appropriate. Marriage had a protective effect against metastatic presentation of oral and laryngeal cancers (oral cancer: adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.87; P < .001; laryngeal cancer: AOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42-0.67; P < .001) but not against oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, or nasopharyngeal cancers. Among patients with nonmetastatic disease, married patients were more likely to receive definitive treatment (overall AOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.60-1.95; P < .001) and had a lower risk of HNCSM (overall adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.68-0.77; P < .001); these associations remained significant across all HNC sites. Among patients with oral and laryngeal cancers, those who are married are less likely to present with metastatic disease. In addition, married patients are more likely to receive definitive treatment and less likely to die from HNC across all HNC sites. This suggests that spousal support may have a role in the surveillance of visual and symptomatic HNC types and leads to higher rates of treatment and better survival across all HNC sites

Incidence and determinants of 1-month mortality after cancer-directed surgery.

282 Background: Death within 1 month of surgery is considered treatment related and serves as an important healthcare quality metric. We sought to identify the incidence of and factors associated with 1-month mortality after cancer-directed surgery. Methods: We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program to study a cohort of 1,110,236 patients diagnosed from 2004-2011 with cancers that are among the 10 most common or most fatal who received cancer-directed surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with 1-month mortality after cancer-directed surgery. Results: 53,498 patients (4.8%) died within 1 month of cancer-directed surgery. Patients who were married, insured, or who had a top 50th percentile income or educational status had lower odds of 1-month mortality from cancer-directed surgery ([adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.79 – 0.82; P<0.001], [AOR 0.88; (0.82 – 0.94); P<0.001], [AOR 0.95; (0.93 – 0.97); P<0.001], and [AOR 0.98; (0.96 – 0.99); P=0.043], respectively). Patients who were non-white minority, male, or older (per year increase), or who had advanced tumor stage 4 disease all had a higher risk of 1-month mortality after cancer-directed surgery, with AORs of 1.13 (1.11 – 1.15), P<0.001; 1.11 (1.08 – 1.13), P<0.001; 1.02 (1.02 – 1.03), P<0.001; and 1.89 (1.82 – 1.95), P<0.001 respectively. Conclusions: Unmarried, uninsured, non-white, male, older, less educated, and poorer patients were all at a significantly higher risk for death within 1 month of cancer-directed surgery. Efforts to reduce 1-month surgical mortality and eliminate sociodemographic disparities in this adverse outcome could significantly improve survival among patients with cancer