Table 3 Effect of radiation oncologist consultation (compared with urologist management alone) on the odds of active treatment (as compared to no treatment) within the year following prostate cancer diagnosis, among a number of clinical relevant subgroups

From: The effect of selection and referral biases for the treatment of localised prostate cancer with surgery or radiation

 

Whole cohort

Low-risk prostate cancer (Gleason ≤6, Stage 1, and PSA <10 ng/mL)

Intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer

 

Odds ratio

95% CI

Odds ratio

95% CI

Odds ratio

95% CI

Primary analysis

Unmatched cohort

5.72

5.43–6.02

9.98

8.40–11.86

3.86

3.52–4.24

Matched cohort

3.70

3.42–4.01

8.40

6.65–10.62

4.00

3.60–4.44

Subgroup analysis of age and comorbidity

Age <70; comorbidity ≤3

2.87

2.57–3.20

7.21

5.81–8.96

2.16

1.85–2.52

Age <70; comorbidity 4 or 5

3.86

3.23–4.62

10.44

7.6–15.23

2.42

1.91–3.07

Age >70; comorbidity ≤3

16.59

13.73–20.05

30.83

16.65–57.08

13.49

10.95–16.61

Age >70; comorbidity 4 or 5

20.18

16.35–24.89

23.77

11.72–48.21

17.53

13.95–22.02

Subgroup analysis of region of residence

Urban

4.72

4.36–5.12

9.70

8.05–11.69

3.76

3.40–4.15

Rural

6.10

4.87–7.65

12.65

7.83–20.14

4.98

3.75–6.61

Subgroup analysis of patients undergoing initial biopsy at an academic facility

 

4.52

3.91–5.24

8.99

6.25–12.94

  

Subgroup analysis of tumour volume among those with low-risk prostate cancer

Low volume

  

4.46

2.14–9.31

  

High volume

  

4.93

2.07–11.74

  

Subgroup analysis of patients receiving MDA on the same day

Urologist alone

referent

Referent

Referent

Same-day RadOnc

3.61

2.96–4.39

6.01

4.07–8.87

3.41

2.62–4.43

Asynchronous RadOnc

5.01

4.63–5.42

10.64

8.90–12.72

3.91

3.55–4.31