OBJECTIVES: To characterize the influence of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) on health-related quality of life after permanent iodine-125 brachytherapy (BT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite health-related quality-of-life instrument was administered to 134 consecutive patients a median of 29 months after BT. A separate group of 111 patients with comparable demographic characteristics without any prior treatment for prostate cancer rendered the baseline information (control group). The scores and symptom rates were compared. The effect of NHT was tested for independence in a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In contrast to patients who received NHT, prostatic edema was hardly detectable 30 days after implantation in patients who received BT alone (comparing median preimplant and postimplant volumes), resulting in a greater dose to the prostate and anterior rectal wall. However, compared with the control group and the patients who received BT alone, the addition of NHT to BT led to lower health-related quality-of-life scores in all domains. Score differences of more than 10 points with a statistical significance were found for the urinary bother, sexual function/bother, and hormonal function/bother domains. Apart from the sexual function scores (patient age shown to be the crucial factor), the influence of NHT remained independent on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The results stress the need for well-considered administration of NHT before BT and the need for reporting the use of NHT in studies dealing with BT-related toxicity.
OBJECTIVES: To characterize the influence of neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) on health-related quality of life after permanent iodine-125 brachytherapy (BT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite health-related quality-of-life instrument was administered to 134 consecutive patients a median of 29 months after BT. A separate group of 111 patients with comparable demographic characteristics without any prior treatment for prostate cancer rendered the baseline information (control group). The scores and symptom rates were compared. The effect of NHT was tested for independence in a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In contrast to patients who received NHT, prostatic edema was hardly detectable 30 days after implantation in patients who received BT alone (comparing median preimplant and postimplant volumes), resulting in a greater dose to the prostate and anterior rectal wall. However, compared with the control group and the patients who received BT alone, the addition of NHT to BT led to lower health-related quality-of-life scores in all domains. Score differences of more than 10 points with a statistical significance were found for the urinary bother, sexual function/bother, and hormonal function/bother domains. Apart from the sexual function scores (patient age shown to be the crucial factor), the influence of NHT remained independent on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The results stress the need for well-considered administration of NHT before BT and the need for reporting the use of NHT in studies dealing with BT-related toxicity.
Authors: Michael Pinkawa; Marc D Piroth; Branka Asadpour; Bernd Gagel; Karin Fischedick; Jaroslav Siluschek; Mareike Kehl; Barbara Krenkel; Michael J Eble Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2009-02-25 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Michael Pinkawa; Karin Fischedick; Bernd Gagel; Marc D Piroth; Branka Asadpour; Jens Klotz; Holger Borchers; Gerhard Jakse; Michael J Eble Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2009-08-24 Impact factor: 4.430