Geographic variability in contemporary utilization of PET imaging for prostate cancer: a medicare claims cohort study
Abstract Background Potential rural-urban differences in prostate cancer care are understudied, particularly regarding the utilization of advanced diagnostic tests. Herein we examined variations in Positron Emission Tomography (PET) utilization for prostate cancer care, including diagnosis, staging...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Cancer Imaging |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-025-00898-6 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Background Potential rural-urban differences in prostate cancer care are understudied, particularly regarding the utilization of advanced diagnostic tests. Herein we examined variations in Positron Emission Tomography (PET) utilization for prostate cancer care, including diagnosis, staging and treatment planning, across residential regions in the United States. Methods Patients newly diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2019 and 2021 and post-diagnostic PETs were identified using full Medicare claims data. PET use was assessed in all newly diagnosed patients, though indications vary by risk. Patients’ counties were categorized as metro, urban, or rural, from most to least urbanized. Regional PET utilization was further examined at the level of hospital referral regions. A multivariable logistic regression model was performed to assess the impact of rurality on PET imaging. A secondary analysis included an interaction term for race to explore the effect of residence on PET imaging by racial group. Results Overall, 495 865 patients were included in the analysis: 393 861 (79.4%) lived in metro, 56 698 (11.4%) in urban and 39 707 (8.0%) in rural counties. Patients in metro counties underwent PET imaging more often (8.4%) than patients in urban (7.3%) or rural counties (7.2%), p < 0.0001. At a level of hospital referral region, PET utilization rates ranged from 2.2 to 20.8%. PET imaging was more commonly performed in White compared to Black or Hispanic patients. Rural patients were less likely to undergo PET imaging compared to metro patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% Confidence interval [CI]: 0.82–0.92 p < 0.0001). Rural Black (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.57–0.83, p < 0.0001) and rural White patients (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.83–0.94 p < 0.0001) were less likely to obtain PET imaging compared to their metro counterparts, p-interaction < 0.0001. Conclusion Rural patients were less likely to undergo PET imaging than metro patients. The effect of rurality was most pronounced among Black patients. Our findings underscore the need for strategies to support equitable use of PET imaging. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1470-7330 |