ABSTRACT Objectives There is an urgent need for more systematic investigations into how image inspection and primary treatment for low‐risk prostate cancer vary by type of medical institution. To investigate disparities in imaging inspections and first‐line treatment depending on the type of medical institution for low‐risk prostate cancer using the Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer database. Methods Data on patients with low‐risk prostate cancer diagnosed between 2016 and 2018 from a nationwide database of the Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer were used. Among these databases, patient and tumor characteristics, image inspections for diagnosis, and first‐line treatment at clinics, community hospitals, and university hospitals were compared statistically. Results This analysis included patients with low‐risk prostate cancer at clinics ( n = 89), community hospitals ( n = 1259), and university hospitals ( n = 671). The three facilities had no significant differences in the performance of computed tomography scans, bone scintigraphy, and magnetic resonance imaging scans. Active surveillance was less performed in clinics and university hospitals, compared with community hospitals. Androgen deprivation therapy was significantly more common, but curative treatments, including radiation and prostatectomy, were less performed in clinics. Curative radiation was significantly more common, but androgen deprivation therapy was less performed in university hospitals. Conclusions Our study analyzed data on low‐risk prostate cancer obtained from a Japanese multi‐institutional registry and showed differences in first‐line treatment options by type of medical institution.
Kobayashi et al. (2026) studied this question.