Title of Research Thesis:

Similar documents
Increasing Awareness, Diagnosis, and Treatment of BPH, LUTS, and EP

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage:

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: sanofi-aventis. Sponsor/company:

The Enlarged Prostate Symptoms, Diagnosis and Treatment

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION SYMPTOM INDEX, PROSTATE VOLUME, PATIENTS WITH BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH):

Shrestha A, Chalise PR, Sharma UK, Gyawali PR, Shrestha GK, Joshi BR. Department of Surgery, TU Teaching Hospital, Maharajgunj, Kathmandu, Nepal

Korean Urologist s View of Practice Patterns in Diagnosis and Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Nationwide Survey

Diagnostic approach to LUTS in men. Prof Dato Dr. Zulkifli Md Zainuddin Consultant Urologist / Head Of Urology Unit UKM Medical Center

Evaluation of Sexual Dysfunction in Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients

INTEROBSERVER VARIATION OF PROSTATIC VOLUME ESTIMATION WITH DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION BY UROLOGICAL STAFFS WITH DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES

50% of men. 90% of men PATIENT FACTSHEET: BPH CONDITION AND TREATMENTS. Want more information? What are the symptoms?

Chapter 4: Research and Future Directions

A prospective study of sexual dysfunction in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

CHAPTER 6. M.D. Eckhardt, G.E.P.M. van Venrooij, T.A. Boon. hoofdstuk :49 Pagina 89

Sexual Dysfunction in Aging Men With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

BPH: a present and future perspective on health impact

Original Policy Date

The Relationship between Prostate Inflammation and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Examination of Baseline Data from the REDUCE Trial

Prostatic Urethral Lift Corporate Medical Policy

EVALUATION OF THE EFFICACY OF TADALAFIL IN IMPROVING LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS IN PATIENTS WITH SYMPTOMATIC BENIGN PROSTATIC ENLARGEMENT

Treatment Patterns in Alpha-Blocker Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Last Review Status/Date: December Summary

AssociationbetweenSocieoeconomicVariablesSEVandBenignProstaticHyperplasiaBPHamongSudanesePatients

INVESTIGATION OF LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS IN UROLOGICAL OUTPATIENTS USING ORIGINAL IPSS PLUS POST MICTURITION DRIBBLE QUESTIONNAIRE

FEP Medical Policy Manual

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Update on Innovative Current Treatments

A unit of International Journal Foundation Page I 96

Dichotomous Estimation of Prostate Volume: A Diagnostic Study of the Accuracy of the Digital Rectal Examination

Control & confidence. You deserve both. YOUR GUIDE TO THE TREATMENT OF BPH

Control & confidence. You deserve both.

Impact of smoking on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) - Single tertiary centre experience

Medical Coverage Policy Prostatic Urethral Lifts

Medical Coverage Policy Prostatic Urethral Lifts

FEP Medical Policy Manual

The ICS- BPH Study: uroflowmetry, lower urinary tract symptoms and bladder outlet obstruction

LONG-TERM SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF TAMSULOSIN FOR THE TREATMENT OF LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS ASSOCIATED WITH BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA

The Risk of Fracture with Taking Alpha Blockers for Treating Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

The patient, your co-pilot in assessing LUTS

REPORTS. Clinical and Economic Outcomes in Patients Treated for Enlarged Prostate

NOTE: This policy is not effective until April 1, Transurethral Water Vapor Thermal Therapy of the Prostate

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Jay Lee, MD, FRCSC Clinical Associate Professor University of Calgary

1088) had an IPSS of 8, indicating moderate-to- problem facing the growing number of elderly men in

Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms BPH vs OAB FLOW vs VOLUME. Matt T. Rosenberg, MD Family Practice Mid Michigan Health Centers Jackson, Michigan

Effect of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Based on the Degree of Obstruction Seen in Urodynamic Study

Medical Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Present and Future Impact

= 0.62, P <0.001) with important clinical exceptions. There was negative correlation between the PV and Qmax (r s

A multicenter European epidemiological prevalence study on chronic prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Prostatic Urethral Lift

ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Key words benign prostatic hyperplasia, bother, lower urinary tract symptoms, quality of life, tamsulosin

Office Management of Benign Prostatic Enlargement

Name of Policy: Transurethral Microwave Thermotherapy

National Prostate Cancer GP Referral Guideline

VOIDING DYSFUNCTION IN ELDERLY MALE CURRENT STATUS

Relationship between visual prostate score (VPSS) and maximum flow rate (Q max. ) in men with urinary tract symptoms

MANAGING BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY IN PRIMARY CARE DR GEORGE G MATHEW CONSULTANT FAMILY PHYSICIAN FELLOW IN SEXUAL & REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH

Evaluation of Recent Trends in Treatment Patterns Among Men With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

INJINTERNATIONAL. Original Article INTRODUCTION

INTERNATIONAL PROSTATE SYMPTOM SCORE IPSS - AUA AS DISCRIMINAT SCALE IN 400 MALE PATIENTS WITH LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS (LUTS)

α-blocker Monotherapy and α-blocker Plus 5-Alpha-Reductase Inhibitor Combination Treatment in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia; 10 Years Long-Term Results

Evidence-based guidelines in lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and variation in care

Subject: Temporary Prostatic Stent and Prostatic Urethral Lift

The Journal of International Medical Research 2012; 40:

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) Important Papers / Landmark. Vijayan Manogran

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT TRAINING

Alpha antagonists from initial concept to routine clinical practice

Evidence based urology in practice: heterogeneity in a systematic review meta-analysis. Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK

Prostatic Urethral Lift. Summary

A SURVEY ON LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS (LUTS) AMONG PATIENTS WITH BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA (BPH) IN HOSPITAL UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA (HUSM)

OVER 70% OF MEN IN THEIR 60s HAVE SYMPTOMS OF BPH 1

Prevalence of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia on Jeju Island: Analysis from a Cross-sectional Community-based Survey

Cooled ThermoTherapy TM

Diagnosis and Mangement of Nocturia in Adults

Introduction. Growths in the prostate can be benign (not cancer) or malignant (cancer).

diagnosis and initial treatment at one of the 27 collaborating CCSS institutions;

DOWNLOAD OR READ : TREATMENT OF BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA PDF EBOOK EPUB MOBI

Voiding Dysfunction. Hyo Serk Lee, Sae Woong Kim 1, Seung-June Oh 2, Myung-Soo Choo 3, Kyu-Sung Lee

Early-Stage Clinical Experiences of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP)

Since 1980, obesity has more than doubled worldwide, and in 2008 over 1.5 billion adults aged 20 years were overweight.

Mini-Invasive Treatment in Urological Diseases Dott. Alberto Saita Responsabile Endourologia Istituto Clinico Humanitas - Rozzano

Key words: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), Prostatic Hyperplasia, Alpha-1 Adrenoceptor Antagonists, Tamsulosin, Terazosin.

ISPUB.COM. E Udeh, N Dakum, O Amu, V Ramyl INTRODUCTION PATIENTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS

Michigan s Diabetes Crisis: Today and Future Trends. Dr. William Rowley Institute for Alternative Futures

Treating BPH: Comparing Rezum UroLift and HoLEP

Questionnaire. 1) Do you see men over the age of 40? 1. Yes 2. No

Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen as a Predictor of Prostate Volume in the Community: The Krimpen Study

A recent randomized controlled trial of a SMP for patients with LUTS reported positive results. In the group of patients who used the

chronic kidney disease in community-dwelling men

Therapeutic Strategies for Managing BPH Progression

The Hallmarks of BPH Progression and Risk Factors


Prostatitis: overview and assessment of pain outcomes and implications for inclusion criteria. Michel Pontari IMMPACT-XX Meeting July 13, 2017

Hyoung Woo Kim, Dae Geun Moon, Hyun Min Kim, Jong Ho Hwang, Soon Chan Kim, Sam Geuk Nam, Jun Tag Park

The population of subjects which was statistically analyzed was the Intent-to-Treat population

LUTS after TURP: How come and how to manage? Matthias Oelke

8/10/2012. Education level and diabetes risk: The EPIC-InterAct study AIM. Background. Case-cohort design. Int J Epidemiol 2012 (in press)

Disease State Prostatitis Indicator Classification Disease Management Strength of Recommendation

Overview. Urology Dine and Learn: Erectile Dysfunction & Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Iain McAuley September 15, 2014

Transcription:

Eastern Michigan University By Fatai Osinowo Adviser s Name: Dr. Stephen Sonstein, PhD Title of Research Thesis: A sub-analyses from the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) Registry and Patient survey: Predictive validity of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in Ethnic Minority- African Americans with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)

2 INTRODUCTION Background Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common causes of urinary problems in aging men, and it conveys its morbidity through lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), urinary complications and reduced quality of life [1]. In the U.S. alone approximately 14 million men suffer from BPH, and at an estimated annual cost for treatment of four (4) billion U.S. dollars [2]. Treatment algorithms for BPH show that patients with mild symptoms or no symptoms need not be treated while those with severe symptoms may need surgery hence, the establishment of a symptom validity scale may be a significant clinical instrument [6]. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) has been developed and used by various researchers for the measurement of benign prostatic symptoms related outcomes such as assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms. It has been adopted by the American Urological Association (AUA) and originally only seven scores categories were described [7]. Recently, the eighth category, the bother Score (or quality of life outcome) was added to the I-PSS by AUA [8]. The IPSS is a questionnaire that grades the severity of symptoms on a numerical scale in categories. The higher the number score, the more the degree of bother and the more aggressive is the recommended treatment. I-PSS is often considered during the development of treatment algorithms and for measuring the efficacy of individual treatment options [6].

3 There have been several assessments of the predictive validity of IPSS in BPH patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), but most of these studies have been conducted in predominantly white populations. Changes in IPSS have been found to be important predictors of disease progression, and in monitoring the response to therapy [9]. Disease progression is defined as worsening of symptoms (increase of points in the I-PSS from baseline initial score) and other urinary complications, while response to therapy (clinical benefit) is defined as point reduction in the I-PSS from baseline Ruffion, A el al. While the I-PSS can predict symptom severity, and disease progression in men with BPH, studies are scanty at best on the racial/ethnic predictive validity of the I-PSS in minority populations like the African Americans (AA) men with BPH. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine if the use of IPSS has a predictive validity of disease progression in African American men diagnosed with BPH associated with LUTS. The test of this hypothesis is a change of IPSS from baseline score. This project may be clinically significant as the outcome measurements may facilitate better understanding of the effect of treatment variations and responses within the African American population. This may subsequently lead to development of more cost effective treatment approach in the management of BPH among this racial/ethnic group.

4 METHODOLOGY Study design: This is a prospective before-after study sub-analysis of the national BPH Registry and Patient Survey with a six-month follow-up. Our study utilized data collected between 06/2004 to 12/2004 from a single outpatient clinic, Millennium Medical Center located in Metropolitan Detroit, Michigan. This study was approved by Millennium Medical Center (letter attached). This study population is comprised of sub-analysis of 68 from 84 African American men only, aged 45 years or older with complete data at time of this analysis. They consented to the BPH Registry and Patient Survey study sponsored by Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc. Millennium Medical Center was one of 500 national study sites and the national study enrolled patients from 01/23/04 through 02/25/2005. The men had documented diagnoses of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) associated with lower urinary tract infection (LUTS) at baseline, and agreed to be treated with prescription products for symptoms of BPH. BPH was defined by clinical diagnosis, which included LUTS and enlarged prostate as detected by digital rectal exam. Also, included in the analysis are patients who agreed to complete the study questionnaire. These questionnaires were administered by a trained study coordinator and medical assistants at the clinic. IPSS score of 0-7 represents mild symptoms; 8 to 19 represents moderate symptoms and 20 or more represents severe symptoms. Questionnaires and the survey measuring instruments were completed by the subjects at baseline and at a follow-up period six (6) months later. Demographic and socio-economic status including data on monthly

5 medication cost, insurance type, education, alcohol intake, and smoking were collated from the completed questionnaire. The subjects who opted for invasive surgery as an initial treatment or have had surgery in the past for BPH were excluded from the study sample. Also, patients with history of urethral stricture, diabetes, and prostate cancer, patients using anti-hypertensive medications like ACE inhibitors or diuretics were excluded. 16 African Americans with incomplete data at time of analysis were excluded. Recruitment was done by non-probability sampling of all eligible African American (AA) men attending Millennium Medical Center. Sample size of this study was 84 subjects and minimum of 50 subjects to account for incomplete data as well as patients lost to follow-up to give a statistical power. Normality will be assumed because of sample size greater than 30. Outcomes: The primary outcomes which were assessed included changes in symptom severity and the degree of bother scores between baseline and at 6 month follow-up as measured with I-PSS. IPSS is considered clinically significant if there is a change from baseline IPSS or bother score compared to the follow-up score. The secondary outcome was the assessment of overall clinical benefit as measured by IPSS from treatment or clinical progression of disease [10, 11]. Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistical indices including frequency mean and standard deviation were utilized. 2 test was used to show the mean differences in IPSS and bother score. All continuous data were expressed as mean ± SD

6 Paired t test was used to show the differences between baseline and follow-up IPSS and bother scores respectively. Multivariate analysis was generated to show relationship with baseline IPSS as dependent variable and adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic variables (age, monthly medical cost, and insurance type, level of education, smoking, alcohol intake and weekly exercise). P value less than 0.05 (p < 0.05) was considered statistically significant. All data statistical analysis was completed by SPSS version 11.0. RESULTS The patient characteristics including the baseline demographic of the study population are shown in Table 1. A total of 68 African American (AA) men aged between 45 to 82 years (n = 68) were included in the study with 84 % of men completing the study. The mean age was 59.8 ± 10.5, with mean baseline and follow-up IPSS (9.6 ± 6.8 and 8.7 ± 6.0) respectively. The baseline and follow-up bother score were (2.5 ±1.1 and 2.2 ±1.0). Further, the demographic show that 66.2% of the study population were self pay patients, 35% were high school graduates and 81% were smokers (Table 1). The Chi- square test of this study showed a statistical difference between baseline IPSS versus follow-up IPSS (p = 0.02); There was also statistical difference between baseline and follow-up bother score of our study (p < 0.0001) (Table 2). However, with paired sample t-test analysis there was significant difference between the means of baseline and follow-up bother score (p < 0.003), but there was no significant statistical difference between the means of baseline versus follow-up IPSS in our study population of AA men (see Table 3). Using a multivariable model, with baseline IPSS as the dependent variable and adjusting for confounder such as age, monthly medical cost, insurance type, level of education, alcohol intake, smoking, and weekly exercise, only patient s age (p < 0.05) and insurance type (p =0.03) were statistically significant (Table 4).

7 DISCUSSION In United States the current prevalence of BPH is about 14 million and the economic burden is about 4 billion dollars annually. There are multi-factorial causes of BPH, but positive family history, and autosomal dominant patterns have been identified. The actual prevalence of BPH differs greatly depending on the geographic region of the study (Garraway, M epid. Of prostate dis, 1995). From our study, we found that the age distribution for BPH was comparable to the age distribution in other studies (Barry, MJ 1992 J Urol; 148: 1549). BPH increase in frequency in men as they age, and histological evidence from autopsy suggests that the incidence of BPH is over 50% in men older than 50 years (Rubenstein, R et al, 2006). I-PSS is a complex but validated instrument, Barry MJ et al, 1992. The predictive validity of IPSS is influenced by demographic factors such as age, and level of education, and other physiologic variables [8, 10]. Our study found that after adjusting for age, monthly medical cost, insurance type, level of education, alcohol intake, smoking, and weekly exercise, only patient s age (p < 0.05), insurance type (p =0.03) and monthly medical cost (p =0.02) were statistically significant. Various studies conducted in patients with BPH associated with LUTS suggested that the severity of the urinary symptoms and the degree of bother experienced by the patients determines the health outcome [3] and their quality of life [4-6]. Our study showed a similar pattern. This study focused in part on the socioeconomic risk factors for BPH and validity of IPSS in AA. We found as in previously published studies that age, insurance type and cost of treatment affected the patient s ability to be treated and therefore, the prevention of BPH progression as measured by IPSS. Our study showed like the findings of Roehrborn, CG et al, that alcohol consumption was not associated with difference in BPH progression or IPSS validity. Alcohol consumption may be protective against BPH development (Tujan, T et al. 2006). Although, not statistically significant in our study 81 % of the men were smokers. While some studies show that smoking promote BPH probably as in our study (Elizabeth, A.P.

8 et al, 1999) various other studies have implicated smoking to have an inhibitory role on the development of BPH (Tujan, T et al. 2006 and Haim, M et al 1995). In the first population based study of African-American (Flint Men s Health Study), risk factors such as demographic, lifestyle and medical history were clearly found to play important role in the natural history of BPH and LUTS. These factors were found to affect the predictive validity of the I-PSS. Limitation of this study: After the questionnaire was administered to the subjects, trained staff did not assist patients in completing the questionnaire. Some questions in the IPSS items need to be modified to sixth grader level for clarification and good description for better validity of a self-administered tool and instrument. We had only one follow up before analyses; other studies have utilized a higher number of follow up visits, and repeated application of the questionnaire to increase instrument reliability and validity. Also, a small sample and single population of AA was utilized. In conclusion, the IPSS symptom score may be dependent on the bother score (quality of life). The test reliability of IPSS is the same and valid in African American males with BPH as it is for the general male population with BPH. More studies are still needed in this area. REFERENCES: 1. Barry MJ, Cockett AT, Holtgrewe HL, McConnell JD, Sihelnik SA, Winfield HN: Relationship of symptoms of prostatism to commonly used physiological and anatomical measures of the severity of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Journal of Urology 1993; 150(2 Pt 1): 351-8. 2. Gjertson CK, Walmsley K, Kaplan SA: Benign prostatic hyperplasia: now we can begin to tailor treatment. Cleve Clin J Med 2004; 71(11): 857, 860, 863-5 passim. 3. Fowler FJ, Jr., Barry MJ: Quality of life assessment for evaluating benign prostatic hyperplasia treatments. An example of using a condition-specific index. European Urology 1993; 24 Suppl 1: 24-7. 4. Barry MJ: Prostate disease potpourri--measurement reliability, therapeutic effectiveness and pathophysiological diagnosis. J Urol 1996; 155(4): 1309-10. 5. Barry MM, Crosby C: Quality of life as an evaluative measure in assessing the impact of community care on people with long-term psychiatric disorders. Br J Psychiatry 1996; 168(2): 210-6. 6. Cam K, Senel F, Akman Y, Erol A: The efficacy of an abbreviated model of the International Prostate Symptom Score in evaluating benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU International 2003; 91(3): 186-9. 7. Barry MJ: Medical outcomes research and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate Suppl 1990; 3: 61-74.

9 8. de la Rosette JJ, van der Schoot DK, Debruyne FM: Recent developments in guidelines on benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Opin Urol 2002; 12(1): 3-6. 9. Barry MJ, Williford WO, Chang Y, et al.: Benign prostatic hyperplasia specific health status measures in clinical research: how much change in the American Urological Association symptom index and the benign prostatic hyperplasia impact index is perceptible to patients? [see comment]. Journal of Urology 1995; 154(5): 1770-4. 10. Lujan Galan M, Paez Borda A, Martin Oses E, Llanes Gonzalez L, Berenguer Sanchez A: [The validity of the IPSS questionnaire in a sample of 262 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia]. Arch Esp Urol 1997; 50(8): 847-53. 11. Barry MJ, O'Leary MP: Advances in benign prostatic hyperplasia. The developmental and clinical utility of symptom scores. Urologic Clinics of North America 1995; 22(2): 299-307. 12. Ruffion A, De La Taille A, Delmas V, Coulange C, Tostain J, Ferriere JM, Saussine C, Perrin P: The minimal important difference (MID) about the international Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS).

10 Table I: Baseline Characteristic Distribution of African American men with BPH VARIABLES Patient Males Age Years (Mean ±SD) 59.8 ± 10.5 Baseline IPSS (Mean ±SD) 9.6 ± 6.8 Follow UP IPSS (Mean ±SD) 8.7 ± 6.0 Baseline bother score (Mean ±SD) 2.5 ± 1.1 Follow Up BS (Mean ±SD) 2.2 ± 1.0 Monthly med cost (%) < $20 $20-50 >$ 50 Insurance type (%) Self pay Self pay & Medicare Medicare 27.9 52.9 19.1 66.2 14.7 19.1 Level of education completed high school (%) 35 Alcohol intake (%) 49 Smoking (%) 81 Weekly exercise (%) 30 Table 2: Chi Square Test of IPSS in AA Men VARIABLES Pearson chi square p-value IPSS 417.28 0.020 Bother score 162.03 0.000 P < 0.05 is significant Regression coefficients show the estimated change in IPSS per unit change in each predictor SD-standard deviation Table 3: Paired t-test of IPSS and bother score at baseline with 6 months follow-up VARIABLES Mean ± SD t-test p-value

11 Baseline (follow-up) IPSS 0.94 ± 5.5 1.4 0.163 Baseline (follow-up )Bother Score 0.29 ± 0.8 3.1 0.003 P < 0.05 is significant Regression coefficients show the estimated change in IPSS per unit change in each predictor Table 4: Multivariate Logistic Regression Model with IPSS as Dependent Variable (n=68) Independent Variables Baseline IPSS Coefficient(SEM) P-value Males Age in yrs (Mean ±SD) 2.2(1.2) 0.05 Bother Score 1.8(1.6) 0.08 Monthly med cost (%) 0.8(0.1) 0.02 Insurance type (%) 25.1(4.7) 0.03 Level of education (%) -3.6(2.1) 0.44 Alcohol intake (%) 2.4(1.6) 0.27 Smoking (%) 4.5(2.2) 0.61 Weekly exercise (%) -7.1(5.3) 0.26 P < 0.05 is significant Regression coefficients show the estimated change in IPSS per unit change in each predictor