Literature DB >> 16194711

Who is the average patient presenting with prostate cancer?

Kirsten L Greene1, Janet E Cowan, Matthew R Cooperberg, Maxwell V Meng, Janeen DuChane, Peter R Carroll.   

Abstract

Prostate cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment have changed dramatically in the last 20 years. Patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer have many treatment options available. We attempted to determine how patient demographics and quality of life (QOL) have changed, and we describe the average patient with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in the early 21st century. From the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) we identified 3003 men with prostate cancer diagnosed between 1997 and 2003 for whom pretreatment demographic and QOL data were available. All patients completed both the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI) and the Rand Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) as self-administered questionnaires at the time of diagnosis. We compared demographic variables (age at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, education, number of comorbidities, body mass index [BMI], and insurance type), treatment choice, and pretreatment QOL scores on the SF-36 and UCLA-PCI scales for the periods 1997 to 1999 or 2000 to 2003. Stratified analysis by risk category was performed for demographic and QOL data for the 2 periods. Race/ethnicity and insurance demographics were statistically different for the 2 periods. Low-risk patients also showed a statistically increased BMI in the 2000 to 2003 period. Risk category predicted performance on both inventories, with low-risk patients having better function than intermediate-risk patients and high-risk patients in the areas of urinary bother, bowel function and bother, and sexual function and bother, as well as in many general well-being and emotional health scales on the SF-36. We conclude that the "average" prostate cancer patient is white, 65 years of age, overweight, educated at a college level, and has 1 to 2 comorbidities. Patients report average or above-average pretreatment health-related QOL for all scales based on 2 validated instruments. In this cohort, more patients chose radical prostatectomy than any other form of treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16194711     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.082

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  9 in total

1.  Apparent diffusion coefficient value is a strong predictor of unsuspected aggressiveness of prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Raphaele Renard Penna; Geraldine Cancel-Tassin; Eva Comperat; Pierre Mozer; Priscilla Léon; Justine Varinot; Morgan Roupret; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Olivier Lucidarme; Olivier Cussenot
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial: VA/NCI/AHRQ Cooperative Studies Program #407 (PIVOT): design and baseline results of a randomized controlled trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting for men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

3.  Surgery for high-risk localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jan Schmitges; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jochen Walz; Markus Graefen
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2011-08

4.  Contrasting roles of the ABCG2 Q141K variant in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kathryn M Sobek; Jessica L Cummings; Dean J Bacich; Denise S O'Keefe
Journal:  Exp Cell Res       Date:  2017-03-11       Impact factor: 3.905

5.  Prognostic implications of an undetectable ultrasensitive prostate-specific antigen level after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Michael L Eisenberg; Benjamin J Davies; Matthew R Cooperberg; Janet E Cowan; Peter R Carroll
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Identification of differentially expressed proteins in direct expressed prostatic secretions of men with organ-confined versus extracapsular prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yunee Kim; Vladimir Ignatchenko; Cindy Q Yao; Irina Kalatskaya; Julius O Nyalwidhe; Raymond S Lance; Anthony O Gramolini; Dean A Troyer; Lincoln D Stein; Paul C Boutros; Jeffrey A Medin; O John Semmes; Richard R Drake; Thomas Kislinger
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 5.911

Review 7.  Treatment strategies for high-risk locally advanced prostate cancer.

Authors:  Seth A Rosenthal; Howard M Sandler
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 14.432

8.  Divorcing diagnosis from treatment: contemporary management of low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Allison S Glass; Sanoj Punnen; Matthew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2013-07-15

9.  The Efficacy and Safety of Tadalafil 5 mg Once Daily in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: 1-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Young Eun Seo; Soo Dong Kim; Tae Hyo Kim; Gyung Tak Sung
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2014-02-14
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.