Disparities in Prostate Cancer Outcomes: The Impact of Race, Ethnicity and Socioeconomic Status

Micheal Buatti^*
*Correspondence: Micheal Buatti, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, Email:

Introduction

Prostate cancer remains one of the most common cancers diagnosed in men, and it is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although survival rates have improved in recent decades due to advancements in early detection, screening, and treatment, significant disparities in prostate cancer outcomes persist. These disparities are not only related to biological factors but are also deeply influenced by social determinants such as race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Men of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, as well as those with varying levels of socioeconomic status, experience differing levels of access to care, treatment options, and health outcomes. This article explores the complex relationship between race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and prostate cancer outcomes, emphasizing how these factors contribute to disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and survival [1].

Description

Numerous studies have shown that African American men experience higher incidence rates of prostate cancer compared to other racial groups, and they are also more likely to be diagnosed at advanced stages of the disease. These men also have a higher risk of dying from prostate cancer, despite similar rates of early detection in some settings. On the other hand, Caucasian men, particularly those with higher socioeconomic status, are often diagnosed earlier, have access to a broader range of treatment options, and tend to experience better outcomes. Other racial and ethnic groups, such as Hispanic and Asian American men, also exhibit varied outcomes depending on the region, access to healthcare, and cultural factors that influence the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. These disparities are multifactorial, with race and ethnicity interacting with a host of social, economic, and healthcare access issues to produce inequitable health outcomes [2].

Socioeconomic status plays a significant role in shaping prostate cancer outcomes, as individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds often face barriers that impact their access to timely and effective healthcare. These barriers include a lack of health insurance, limited access to specialized care, and reduced availability of diagnostic and therapeutic options. Low socioeconomic status is also associated with higher levels of stress, poor nutrition, and limited access to health education, all of which can negatively impact both the ability to prevent and the ability to successfully treat prostate cancer. Additionally, lower socioeconomic groups are more likely to be diagnosed at later stages, when the cancer is less responsive to treatment, and this delay often results in worse outcomes [3].

While these disparities are well-documented, the root causes of these inequities are multifactorial and complex. Racial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer outcomes are partly driven by historical, social, and systemic factors that shape healthcare access and treatment. African American men, for example, are more likely to experience discrimination in healthcare settings, which can lead to mistrust of medical professionals and reluctance to seek timely medical care. Structural racism within the healthcare system has also been shown to affect the quality of care that racial and ethnic minorities receive, further exacerbating disparities in cancer outcomes. Additionally, differences in cultural attitudes towards healthcare, disease, and treatment can also influence the way patients from different racial or ethnic backgrounds seek care and adhere to treatment plans [4,5].

Conclusion

In conclusion, disparities in prostate cancer outcomes are influenced by a complex interplay of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors that affect diagnosis, treatment, and survival. Men from different racial and ethnic backgrounds, particularly African American men, face higher risks of developing aggressive prostate cancer and experiencing worse outcomes. Socioeconomic factors such as access to healthcare, insurance coverage, and geographic location further exacerbate these disparities. Addressing these disparities requires a multifaceted approach, including increasing awareness, improving healthcare access, and ensuring that all patients receive equitable and culturally sensitive care. By tackling the root causes of these disparities, we can improve prostate cancer outcomes for all men, regardless of their race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status, and ultimately work towards a more equitable healthcare system for all individuals affected by this disease.

Acknowledgment

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Smith, Matthew R., Maha Hussain, Fred Saad and Karim Fizazi, et al. "Darolutamide and survival in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer." N Engl J Med 386 (2022): 1132-1142.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

2. Fizazi, Karim, Stéphanie Foulon, Joan Carles and Guilhem Roubaud, et al. "Abiraterone plus prednisone added to androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (PEACE-1): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study with a 2 × 2 factorial design." Lancet 399 (2022): 1695-1707.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

3. Page, Matthew J., Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt and Isabelle Boutron, et al. "The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews." BMJ 372 (2021).

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

4. Gleason, Donald F. and George T. Mellinger. "Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging." J Urol 111 (1974): 58-64.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at

5. Epstein, Jonathan I., William C. Allsbrook Jr, Mahul B. Amin and Lars L. Egevad, et al. "The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma." The Am J Surg Pathol 29 (2005): 1228-1242.

Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at