Racial and Ethnic Trends in Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Philadelphia, PA: an Observational Study

  • Charnita Zeigler-JohnsonEmail author
  • Scott Keith
  • Russell McIntire
  • Tashika Robinson
  • Amy Leader
  • Karen Glanz



To learn more about local prostate cancer (PCa) disparities, we conducted descriptive analyses of the role of race and age in PCa using the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry data for Philadelphia (2005–2014).


We focused on the most prevalent race/ethnic groups: white (33%), black (44%), and Hispanic (9%). Outcomes included PCa rates, tumor stage, and tumor grade. Percent change was used to describe changes in age-adjusted incidence and mortality rates. Frequency tables and logistic regression models were used to describe trends in proportions of advanced PCa by race and time. Race-by-time interaction terms were retained in the models if statistically significant.


PCa incidence was highest for black men over time. Incidence rates declined over time for all race groups (− 28% for white men to − 38% for Hispanic men). PCa mortality rates declined in a less universal manner (− 5% for blacks to − 32% for whites). Each year, odds increased across all race groups for advanced tumor stage (4% each year among white and Hispanic men and 9% each year among black men) and for advanced tumor grade (4% each year among white and black men and 23% each year among Hispanic men). Among younger men, black men experienced significantly increased odds of advanced tumor stage each year (8%) and Hispanics experienced significantly increased odds of advanced tumor grade each year (30%).


Black men remain at highest PCa risk relative to other racial/ethnic groups in Philadelphia. Younger black and Hispanic men are at particular risk for advanced PCa at diagnosis.


Prostate cancer trends Philadelphia Race/ethnicity 



Prostate cancer


United States Preventive Services Task Force


Enterprise Data Dissemination Informatics Exchange


Prostate specific antigen


Risk-adjusted incidence rates


Authors’ contributions

CZJ acquired data; was responsible for the study concept/design, analysis, and interpretation; and drafted the manuscript. SK assisted with data analysis and interpretation and revised the manuscript. RM revised the manuscript. TR was responsible for the data analysis and revised the manuscript. AL revised the manuscript. KG was responsible for the study concept and revised the manuscript.


This study was funded by the Department of Defense (DOD W81XWH-15-1-0693). However, the DOD did not play a role in the study design, analysis, interpretation of results, or writing of the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict interests.

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

This observational study based upon Pennsylvania Cancer Registry data was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Thomas Jefferson University (Philadelphia, PA). The IRB reference number is 15G.337. Informed consent was waived by the review board.


  1. 1.
    Howlader N, Noone A, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Miller D, Altekruse S, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2011. Besthesda: National Cancer Institute; 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    SEER. SEER cancer statistics factsheets: prostate cancer. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute; 2016.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rebbeck TR, Haas GP. Temporal trends and racial disparities in global prostate cancer prevalence. Can J Urol. 2014;21:7496–506.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tyson MD II, Castle EP. Racial disparities in survival for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer adjusted for treatment effects. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89:300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ. The US Preventive Services Task Force 2017 draft recommendation statement on screening for prostate cancer: an invitation to review and comment. JAMA. 2017;317:1949–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li J, German R, King J, Joseph D, Thompson T, Wu XC, et al. Recent trends in prostate cancer testing and incidence among men under age of 50. Cancer Epidemiol. 2012;36:122–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith RA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Brooks D, Doroshenk M, Fedewa S, Saslow D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2015: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:30–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zeigler-Johnson CM, Tierney A, Rebbeck TR, Rundle A. Prostate cancer severity associations with neighborhood deprivation. Prostate Cancer. 2011;2011:846263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    PA_Prostate_Cancer_Task_Force (2017) Prostate cancer recommendations for improving the health of Pennsylvania men.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    The_PEW_Cheritable_Trusts (2011) A city transformed—the racial and ethnic changes in Philadelphia over the last 20 years.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    PA_Department_of_Health (2017) Enterprise data dissemination informatics exchange.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee DJ, Mallin K, Graves AJ, Chang SS, Penson DF, Resnick MJ, et al. Recent changes in prostate cancer screening practices and epidemiology. In: J Urol, vol. 198; 2017. p. 1230–40.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Houston KA, King J, Li J, Jemal A (2018) Trends in prostate cancer incidence rates and prevalence of prostate-specific antigen screening by socioeconomic status and regions in the US, 2004–2013. J Urol. 199:676–682.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aizer AA, Wilhite TJ, Chen MH, Graham PL, Choueiri TK, Hoffman KE, et al. Lack of reduction in racial disparities in cancer-specific mortality over a 20-year period. Cancer. 2014;120:1532–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li C, Ekwueme DU. Years of potential life lost caused by prostate cancer deaths in the United States—projection from 2004 through 2050. Cancer Epidemiol. 2010;34:368–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cremers RG, Karim-Kos HE, Houterman S, Verhoeven RH, Schroder FH, van der Kwast TH, et al. Prostate cancer: trends in incidence, survival and mortality in the Netherlands, 1989-2006. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2077–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vis AN, Roemeling S, Reedijk AM, Otto SJ, Schroder FH. Overall survival in the intervention arm of a randomized controlled screening trial for prostate cancer compared with a clinically diagnosed cohort. Eur Urol. 2008;53:91–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bowen DJ, Hannon PA, Harris JR, Martin DP. Prostate cancer screening and informed decision-making: provider and patient perspectives. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2011;14:155–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loeb S. Guideline of guidelines: prostate cancer screening. BJU Int. 2014;114:323–5.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chornokur G, Dalton K, Borysova M, Kumar N. Disparities at presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and survival in African American men affected by prostate cancer. Prostate. 2011;71:985–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gjertson CK, Albertsen PC. Use and assessment of PSA in prostate cancer. Med Clin N Am. 2011;95:191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stephenson AJ, Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Bianco FJ Jr, Yossepowitch O, Vickers AJ, et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4300–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lim LS, Sherin K, Committee APP. Screening for prostate cancer in U.S. men. ACPM position statement on preventive practice. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34:164–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Powell IJ, Vigneau FD, Bock CH, Ruterbusch J, Heilbrun LK. Reducing prostate cancer racial disparity: evidence for aggressive early prostate cancer PSA testing of African American men. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2014;23:1505–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Zappa M, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014;384:2027–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Banerji JS, Wolff EM, Massman JD 3rd, Odem-Davis K, Porter CR, Corman JM. Prostate needle biopsy outcomes in the era of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation against prostate specific antigen based screening. J Urol. 2016;195:66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kavasmaa OT, Tyomkin DB, Mehik A, Parpala TM, Tonttila P, Paananen I, et al. Changing trends in symptomatology, diagnostics, stage and survival of prostate cancer in Northern Finland during a period of 20 years. World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11:258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jani AB, Johnstone PA, Liauw SL, Master VA, Brawley OW. Age and grade trends in prostate cancer (1974-2003): a surveillance, epidemiology, and end results registry analysis. Am J Clin Oncol. 2008;31:375–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bellizzi KM, Breslau ES, Burness A, Waldron W. Prevalence of cancer screening in older, racially diverse adults: still screening after all these years. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171:2031–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Public Health Management Corporation (2015) Community Health Database. Accessed 3 Jan 2017.
  31. 31.
    Mendhiratta N, Lee T, Prabhu V, Llukani E, Lepor H. 10-year mortality after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen screening era. Urology. 2015;86:783–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rassweiler J, Rassweiler MC, Kenngott H, Frede T, Michel MS, Alken P, et al. The past, present and future of minimally invasive therapy in urology: a review and speculative outlook. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2013;22:200–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Kowalczyk KJ, Hu JC. Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol. 2012;187:1392–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mitchell DL, Tracy CR, Buatti JM, Smith MC, Snow AN, Henry MD, et al. Individualization of adjuvant therapy after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: current status and future directions. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016;14:12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dulaney CR, Osula DO, Yang ES, Rais-Bahrami S. Prostate radiotherapy in the era of advanced imaging and precision medicine. Prostate Cancer. 2016;2016:4897515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Merrill RM, Sloan A. Risk-adjusted incidence rates for prostate cancer in the United States. Prostate. 2012;72:181–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shafique K, Morrison DS. Socio-economic inequalities in survival of patients with prostate cancer: role of age and Gleason grade at diagnosis. PLoS One. 2013;8:e56184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Aarts MJ, van der Aa MA, Coebergh JW, Louwman WJ. Reduction of socioeconomic inequality in cancer incidence in the south of the Netherlands during 1996-2008. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2633–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gonsalves L, Cartmel B, Mueller L. The burden of cancer in Connecticut. Conn Med. 2012;76:335–51.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Siegel RL, Fedewa SA, Miller KD, Goding-Sauer A, Pinheiro PS, Martinez-Tyson D, et al. Cancer statistics for Hispanics/Latinos, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:457–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© W. Montague Cobb-NMA Health Institute 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical Oncology, Division of Population Science, Sidney Kimmel Cancer CenterThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Pharmacology and Experimental TherapeuticsThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.College of Population HealthThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  4. 4.Center for Epidemiology and BiostatisticsUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations