Abstract: PD03-06
Sources of Funding: none

Introduction

Studies have noted contrasting findings with regards to the contemporary incidence of metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) in the US. We sought to assess the trends in the incidence of metastatic PCa using nationally representative data._x000D_

Methods

We used data from the 18 population- based tumor registries of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) 2004-2013 database. We focused on 23,003 men aged 45 and above diagnosed with clinically metastatic PCa (ICD-O-3 code C61.9) between the years 2004-2013, using the American Joint Committee on Cancer 6th (2004-09) and 7th (2010+) clinical M staging. We assessed the temporal trends in the delay- and age-adjusted incidence (per 100,000 US men) of metastatic PCa, using annual percentage change (APC; weighted least squares method). Analyses were stratified by year groups (2004-2008 vs. 2009-2013) and age categories (45-74 vs 75 and above). We also performed sensitivity analyses using JoinPoint regression to identify the time points associated with a change in the incidence of metastatic PCa, overall and stratified by aforementioned age groups.

Results

Overall, there was a non-significant change in incidence between 2004-2008, but a significant increase between 2009-2013 (APC 2.9%, p=0.01). For men aged 45-74, metastatic PCa incidence increased by 2.6% per year between 2009-2013 (p=0.008, Figure 1b). Men aged ≥75 showed a significant decline in the incidence of metastatic PCa for 2004-2008 (APC -2.5%, p=0.02), and a non-significant increase for 2009-2013 (APC 3.2%, p=0.1; Figure 1b). JoinPoint regression analyses showed similar findings, with a significant increase in metastatic PCa incidence starting in 2009 overall and for men aged 45-74 (Figures 1c-e).

Conclusions

Our results suggest an increase in the incidence of metastatic PCa in the US, beginning in the more contemporary time period (2009-13) for men aged 45 and above. Future large scale studies are warranted to validate our findings, identify the causes and understand its implications on health care policy for US men.

Funding

none