Literature DB >> 11018094

Health outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study.

A L Potosky1, J Legler, P C Albertsen, J L Stanford, F D Gilliland, A S Hamilton, J W Eley, R A Stephenson, L C Harlan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy are the two major therapeutic options for treating clinically localized prostate cancer. Because survival is often favorable regardless of therapy, treatment decisions may depend on other therapy-specific health outcomes. In this study, we compared the effects of two treatments on urinary, bowel, and sexual functions and on general health-related quality-of-life outcomes over a 2-year period following initial treatment.
METHODS: A diverse cohort of patients aged 55-74 years who were newly diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer and received either radical prostatectomy (n = 1156) or external beam radiotherapy (n = 435) were included in this study. A propensity score was used to balance the two treatment groups because they differed in some baseline characteristics. This score was used in multivariable cross-sectional and longitudinal regression analyses comparing the treatment groups. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS: Almost 2 years after treatment, men receiving radical prostatectomy were more likely than men receiving radiotherapy to be incontinent (9.6% versus 3.5%; P:<.001) and to have higher rates of impotence (79.6% versus 61.5%; P:<.001), although large, statistically significant declines in sexual function were observed in both treatment groups. In contrast, men receiving radiotherapy reported greater declines in bowel function than did men receiving radical prostatectomy. All of these differences remained after adjustments for propensity score. The treatment groups were similar in terms of general health-related quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: There are important differences in urinary, bowel, and sexual functions over 2 years after different treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer. In contrast to previous reports, these outcome differences reflect treatment delivered to a heterogeneous group of patients in diverse health care settings. These results provide comprehensive and representative information about long-term treatment complications to help guide and inform patients and clinicians about prostate cancer treatment decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11018094     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/92.19.1582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  107 in total

1.  Assessing longitudinal quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses: a multilevel modeling approach.

Authors:  Lixin Song; Laurel L Northouse; Thomas M Braun; Lingling Zhang; Bernadine Cimprich; David L Ronis; Darlene W Mood
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Prediction of erectile function following treatment for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Meredith M Regan; Matthew R Cooperberg; John T Wei; Jeff M Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Larry Hembroff; Natalia Sadetsky; Christopher S Saigal; Mark S Litwin; Eric Klein; Adam S Kibel; Daniel A Hamstra; Louis L Pisters; Deborah A Kuban; Irving D Kaplan; David P Wood; Jay Ciezki; Rodney L Dunn; Peter R Carroll; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Screening without evidence of efficacy.

Authors:  Malcolm Law
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-02-07

4.  System for MR image-guided prostate interventions: canine study.

Authors:  Robert C Susil; Axel Krieger; J Andrew Derbyshire; Attila Tanacs; Louis L Whitcomb; Gabor Fichtinger; Ergin Atalar
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 5.  [Functional results of various surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy].

Authors:  U Michl; M Graefen; J Noldus; T Eggert; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  System for prostate brachytherapy and biopsy in a standard 1.5 T MRI scanner.

Authors:  Robert C Susil; Kevin Camphausen; Peter Choyke; Elliot R McVeigh; Gary S Gustafson; Holly Ning; Robert W Miller; Ergin Atalar; C Norman Coleman; Cynthia Ménard
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  Race/ethnicity and the receipt of watchful waiting for the initial management of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Vickie L Shavers; Martin L Brown; Arnold L Potosky; Carrie N Klabunde; W W Davis; Judd W Moul; Angela Fahey
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Oral selenium supplementation has no effect on prostate-specific antigen velocity in men undergoing active surveillance for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Suzanne Stratton; Amit M Algotar; James Ranger-Moore; Steven P Stratton; Elizabeth H Slate; Chiu-Hsieh Hsu; Patricia A Thompson; Larry C Clark; Frederick R Ahmann
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2010-07-20

9.  Effects of high-intensity interval training compared with resistance training in prostate cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Gilles Caty; Gregory Reychler; Elise Piraux; Laurette Renard; David Vancraeynest; Bertrand Tombal; Xavier Geets
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Cancer outcomes research in a rural area: a multi-institution partnership model.

Authors:  Michael Goodman; Lyn Almon; Rana Bayakly; Susan Butler; Carol Crosby; Colleen DiIorio; Donatus Ekwueme; Diane Fletcher; John Fowler; Theresa Gillespie; Karen Glanz; Ingrid Hall; Judith Lee; Jonathan Liff; Joseph Lipscomb; Lori A Pollack; Lisa C Richardson; Phillip Roberts; Kyle Steenland; Kevin Ward
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2009-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.