QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

Evidence-Based Project and Quality Initiative Towards Improving Decision Making and Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Bone Health at Salt Lake City VA

Author and Disclosure Information

 

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Long term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) forms the backbone of treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. Bone modifying agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, may be indicated in osteoporosis dosing in the castration-sensitive setting, and more intense dosing for bone metastases in the castration-resistant setting only. Dental evaluation and care prior to bone modifying agent use in osteoporosis or bone metastases has safety benefit. Historical lack of clinical practice guidelines for bone health in men with prostate cancer have limited evidence-based practice. A retrospective review of patients on active bone remodeling therapies for prostate cancer, Revealed that several patients with castration-sensitive disease received treatment at dosing supported only in the setting of castration resistance with bone metastases. Some patients had not completed dental evaluation prior to initiation of bone modifying agents.

METHODS: Following evidence-based expert consensus recommendations from multiple sources regarding bone health in prostate cancer, we created an algorithm- based clinical practice tool. This decision tool is activated within the electronic medical record order set when starting therapy with a bone remodeling agent in patients with prostate cancer. The tool supports treatment with appropriate dosing for the indication, and ensures pretreatment supportive care, such as dental evaluation, is performed.

DATA ANALYSIS/RESULTS: Since implementation of the algorithm-based decision tool, 0/10 (0%) patients were placed on inappropriate bone modifying agent dosing and dental care was addressed on every patient 10/10 (100%) initiating treatment. When evaluating the effect of the decision tool on the desired outcomes, we note that the fraction of patients getting overly intensive treatment before and after implementation of the tool was 24/41 vs 0/10 (p = 0.0008); lack of pretreatment dental assessment before and after implementation of the tool was noted to be 12/41 vs 0/10): ( =0.09). Fisher’s Exact Test was used for both comparisons.

IMPLICATIONS: Through implementation of an evidence- based algorithm and clinical practice tool while prescribing bone remodeling agents to patients with prostate cancer, we were able to improve our institutional practice to a high quality evidenced-based approach to prostate cancer bone health care.

Recommended Reading

Equal Access Makes A Difference in Surviving Prostate Cancer
AVAHO
Combined biopsy method improves diagnostic accuracy in prostate cancer
AVAHO
First PARP inhibitor approved for metastatic prostate cancer
AVAHO
FDA approves olaparib for certain metastatic prostate cancers
AVAHO
Hypercalcemia Is of Uncertain Significance in Patients With Advanced Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate
AVAHO
Genetic differences by ancestry shouldn’t impact efficacy of prostate cancer therapies
AVAHO
Better continence rate gives robotic prostatectomy the edge
AVAHO
A Cognitive-Behavioral Stress Management Group for Men with Urologic Cancers: Pre- and Post-COVID
AVAHO
Clinical and Dosimetric Predictors of Toxicity for Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer Using Moderately Hypofractionated Radiotherapy
AVAHO
DNA Repair Gene Variants in Patients With Prostate Cancer Achieving Durable Clinical Benefit With PARP Inhibitors
AVAHO