Rationalising bone scan usage in prostate cancer staging – A UK nationwide audit of the BAUS Radical Prostatectomy (RP) database

Abstract

Objective:

With new evidence showing no need to perform staging bone scans (BS) in intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PC), we reviewed the practice and trends of performing BS in PC patients across the United Kingdom by analysing a cohort of PC patients from the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) radical prostatectomy (RP) database. We analysed the database as such for data entry and regional trends.

Materials and methods:

Between 2007 and 2016, patients who had BS were categorised according to D’Amico risk categories as low (LR), intermediate (IR) and high (HR). The IR group was subdivided into primary patterns 3 (IR3) and 4 (IR4). Subgroup analysis based on prostate-specific antigen and Gleason score was performed. Regional trends regarding data entry and no staging scans before RP were also analysed.

Results:

Over the study period, the database included 39,382 patients. The quality of data improved from 2011. A consistent drop in proportion of LR patients who had BS was noted over the study period which stood at less than 1% in 2016. This parallels an increase in proportion of HR patients, but the IR3 and IR4 proportion remained stable throughout the study. A large proportion of HR patients were deemed HR because of clinical T stage in the subgroup analysis. A progressive drop is noted in patients having no scan before RP, which stood at 3.66% in 2016. Out of 15 regions, 13 showed improvement in data completeness.

Conclusion:

In the United Kingdom, good adherence with guidelines to avoid BS in LR patients is noted but is still continued in IR. Updating the guidelines which are still not uniform and involvement of specialist multidisciplinary teams to reflect these would help reduce a considerable number of unnecessary BS being performed. Regional trends shown would help relevant centres to review their data entry process and potentially improve them.

Level of evidence:

not applicable for this multicentre audit.

Keywords

BAUS audit bony metastasis prostate cancer radical prostatectomy national database prostate cancer guidelines staging bone scan

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

KandaSwamy

Bennett

Narahari

, et al. Establishing the pathways and indications for performing isotope bone scans in newly diagnosed intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer – results from a large contemporaneous cohort. BJU Int 2017; 120: E59-E63.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guideline on prostate cancer diagnosis and management (NG131), https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng131/chapter/Recommendations#assessment-and-diagnosis (May 2019, accessed July 2019).

European Association of Urology. EAU-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/09-Prostate-Cancer_2017_web.pdf (2017, accessed online June 2018).

Ojerholm

Van Arsdalen

Roses

, et al. Initiative to reduce bone scans for low-risk prostate cancer patients: A quasi-experimental before-and-after study in a Veterans Affairs hospital. Adv Radiat Oncol 2017; 2: 416–419.

Prasad

Lipsitz

, et al. Inappropriate utilization of radiographic imaging in men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in the United States. Cancer 2012; 118: 1260–1267.

Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence (May 2001), https://www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/ (March 2009, accessed June 2018).

European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/08_Prostate_Cancer-September-22nd-2011.pdf (2011, accessed June 2018).

European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/07_Prostate_Cancer-pocket-version-2012.pdf (2012, accessed June 2018).

Heidenreich

Bastian

Bellmunt

, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent – update 2013. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 124-137.

10.

European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/1607-Prostate-Cancer_LRV3.pdf (2014, accessed June 2018).

11.

European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/09-Prostate-Cancer_LR.pdf (2015, accessed June 2018).

12.

European Association of Urology. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer, https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Guidelines-Prostate-Cancer-2016.pdf (2016, accessed June 2018).

13.

European Association of Urology. Guidelines on prostate cancer, http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/#5 (accessed June 2018).

14.

Choosing Wisely Canada. Five things physicians and patients should question by Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine, https://choosingwiselycanada.org/nuclearmedicine (June 2017, accessed June 2018).

15.

Choosing Wisely, American Urological Association, http://www.choosingwisely.org/clinician-lists/american-urological-association-routine-bone-scans-with-low-risk-prostate-cancer/ (June 2019, accessed June 2018).

16.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare program merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) and alternative payment model (APM) incentive under the physician fee schedule, and criteria for physician-focused payment models, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-11-04/pdf/2016-25240.pdf (2016, accessed June 2018).