Outcomes for men under 65 with high-risk prostate cancer with Medicaid versus private insurance

198 Background: Increased Medicaid coverage, due to the Affordable Care Act, has been hypothesized to reduce racial disparities. We therefore examined the association between private insurance vs. Medicaid, race, and outcomes for the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer (CaP) among men < 65 years old. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program identified 116,853 men < 65 diagnosed with CaP from 2007-2011. Multivariable logistic regression modeled the association between insurance status (IS) and stage at presentation. Among men with high-risk CaP, the associations between IS and receipt of definitive therapy (DT) and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) were determined using multivariable logistic and Fine and Gray competing-risks regression models, respectively. Results: Compared to privately insured men, those with Medicaid were more likely to present with metastatic disease (Mets) (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 5.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.25-6.40; P < 0.001). Among men with high-risk disease, men with Medicaid were less likely to receive DT (AOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.51-0.60; P < 0.001) and had increased PCSM (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 1.8; 95% CI 1.27-2.54; P = 0.001). There were significant interactions (INT) between race and Medicaid for the outcomes of PCSM (PINT= 0.05) and Mets (PINT= 0.003). Specifically, gaps in PCSM and Mets were observed among privately insured men, with increased PCSM (AHR 1.51; 95% CI 1.18-1.94; P = 0.001) and Mets (AOR 1.33; 95% CI 1.20-1.48; P < 0.001), while there were no observed disparities among men with Medicaid with regards to PCSM (AHR 0.72; 95% CI 0.34-1.52; P = 0.387) and Mets (AOR 1.03 95% CI 0.86-1.24; P = 0.730). Conclusions: Among men with CaP, African American men are more likely to present with Mets, less likely to receive DT, and have increased PCSM compared to non-black men. These disparities are observed in heterogeneous privately insured cohorts. However, among men with Medicaid, outcomes were equally worse. Furthermore, there was a significant INT between race and IS, indicating more-than-additive effects. Our study suggests that while increased access to Medicaid could act to reduce disparities seen in CaP, outcomes need to be improved overall.