Utilization of Radical Prostatectomy vs. Radiation Therapy for Gleason Grade Group 5 Prostate Cancer before and after USPSTF Grade D Recommendation against Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in 2012

The 2012 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Grade D recommendation against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has resulted in a shift to higher-stage prostate cancer (PC) at diagnosis. While incidence of low-risk prostate cancer has declined, more men are diagnosed with high-risk disease, and multimodal treatment is often required. The impact of this epidemiologic shift on practice patterns, specifically radical prostatectomy (RP) versus definitive radiation therapy (RT), for men with localized PC at high risk of recurrence is unknown. Herein, we evaluate the utilization of RP versus RT in the United States for Gleason grade group 5 (GG5) prostate cancer before and after 2012.We identified 34,011 men with localized GG5 PC treated with (1) RP or (2) RT plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) between 2004 and 2017 in the National Cancer Database. We excluded those who were clinically node-positive, had metastatic disease, or received chemotherapy or palliative-intent treatment. Chi-square was used to compare the relative use of RP and RT before versus after January 1, 2012, corresponding to the year of USPSTF recommendation against PSA screening. Annual use of RP versus RT from 2004 to 2017 was compared in academic and non-academic centers using Cochran-Armitage test for trend. Joinpoint regression assessed if 2012 was significant for inflection of crude rates of RP. Finally, we modeled the effect of treatment year (i.e., 2012-2017 versus 2004-2011) on use of RP using multivariable logistic regression. Sensitivity analysis tested an interaction term for facility type (i.e., academic versus community). Tests were two-sided with a 0.05 level of significance.Of the eligible men, 10,745 (31.6%) had T3-T4 disease. Between 2004 and 2011, 36.5% (n = 5,483) underwent RP; between 2012 and 2017, 42.3% (n = 8,034) underwent RP (p = .02). Across all centers, use of RP increased from 31% to 41% (p for trend <.001). In academic centers, use of RP increased from 32% to 44% (p for trend <.001); in community centers, use of RP increased from 30% to 39% (p for trend <.001). 2012 was associated with significant inflection for increase in RP use in all centers. On multivariable analysis, there was an increased odds of receiving RP after 2012 (adjusted OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.28-1.40, p<.001). No differential effect by facility type was observed (p = .15).Utilization of RP for GG5 PC has significantly increased in the United States over the past decade, particularly after the USPSTF Grade D recommendation against PSA screening in 2012. It remains unknown whether oncologic or functional outcomes may be compromised in this group of high-risk men, many of whom require post-prostatectomy RT and/or ADT. While historically rare, prospective comparison of RP versus RT+ADT for GG5 PC may be helpful given the evolving epidemiology of localized PC.