Literature DB >> 19352607

[Therapy choices of German urologists and radio-oncologists if personally diagnosed with localized prostate cancer].

R Gillitzer1, C Hampel, C Thomas, F Schmidt, S W Melchior, S Pahernik, H Schmidberger, J W Thüroff.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the currently preferred primary treatment options among German urologists and radio-oncologists if personally diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, taking into consideration the different prognostic risk groups.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to 3,217 urologists and 598 radio-oncologists. They were asked to choose their preferred primary treatment option if they were personally diagnosed with prostate cancer, taking into consideration the different prognostic risk groups: low risk [Gleason score < or =6, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) < or =10 microg/l, T1c], intermediate risk (Gleason score 7, PSA 11-19 microg/l, T2), and high risk (Gleason score > or =8, PSA> or =20 microg/l, T3). Surgical options were further subdivided according to technique (retropubic, laparoscopic, perineal).
RESULTS: The questionnaire return rate was 49% for urologists and 41% for radio-oncologists. The mean age was 48 years (28-86) for urologists and 47 years (29-68) for radio-oncologists. Primary surgical treatment was selected by 62% of urologists for low-risk prostate cancer, 90% for intermediate-risk prostate cancer, and 77% for high-risk prostate cancer. Radiotherapy as a primary treatment option was elected by 71% of radio-oncologists for low-risk prostate cancer, 84% for intermediate-risk prostate cancer, and 89% for high-risk prostate cancer. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and perineal prostatectomy would be chosen by 61%, 28%, and 10% of urologists, respectively, for low-risk prostate cancer; by 70%, 24%, and 6%, respectively, for intermediate-risk prostate cancer, and by 80%, 15%, and 5%, respectively for high-risk prostate cancer.
CONCLUSION: Urologists prefer surgery and radio-oncologists radiotherapy for primary treatment of prostate cancer, irrespective of the prognostic risk group. Particularly for high-risk prostate cancer, the majority of radiooncologists would still choose radiotherapy as a primary treatment option. In the age of minimally invasive surgery, radical retropubic prostatectomy is still the preferred surgical treatment option among urologists for any prognostic risk group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19352607     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-008-1928-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  20 in total

1.  2003 American Urological Association Gallup survey: physician practice patterns, cryosurgery/brachytherapy, male infertility, female urology and insurance/professional liability.

Authors:  Michael P O'leary; Neil H Baum; William W Bohnert; Richard Blizzard; William W Bonney; Thomas P Cooper; Martin K Dineen; William F Gee; E Ann Gormley; Jeffrey M Ignatoff; Daniel A Nachtsheim; M Ray Painter; Raju Thomas; John T Wei
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 2.  Active surveillance for prostate cancer: for whom?

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Why do men choose one treatment over another?: a review of patient decision making for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Steven B Zeliadt; Scott D Ramsey; David F Penson; Ingrid J Hall; Donatus U Ekwueme; Leonard Stroud; Judith W Lee
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  What prostate cancer patients should know: variation in professionals' opinions.

Authors:  D Feldman-Stewart; M D Brundage; C Hayter; P Groome; J C Nickel; H Downes; W J Mackillop
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Primary treatment choices for men with clinically localized prostate carcinoma detected by screening.

Authors:  Y Yan; G F Carvalhal; W J Catalona; J D Young
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Long-term survival in men with high grade prostate cancer: a comparison between conservative treatment, radiation therapy and radical prostatectomy--a propensity scoring approach.

Authors:  Ashutosh Tewari; George Divine; Peter Chang; M Mendel Shemtov; Matthew Milowsky; David Nanus; Mani Menon
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Why patients choose prostatectomy or brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer: results of a descriptive survey.

Authors:  Joshua D Hall; James C Boyd; Marguerite C Lippert; Dan Theodorescu
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Treatment decision-making by men with localized prostate cancer: the influence of personal factors.

Authors:  Donna L Berry; William J Ellis; Nancy Fugate Woods; Christina Schwien; Kristin H Mullen; Claire Yang
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.498

9.  Cancer-specific mortality after surgery or radiation for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer managed during the prostate-specific antigen era.

Authors:  Anthony V D'Amico; Judd Moul; Peter R Carroll; Leon Sun; Deborah Lubeck; Ming-Hui Chen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-06-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 10.  Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities.

Authors:  Scott E Eggener; Peter T Scardino; Peter R Carroll; Michael J Zelefsky; Oliver Sartor; Hedvig Hricak; Thomas M Wheeler; Samson W Fine; John Trachtenberg; Mark A Rubin; Mak Ohori; Kentaro Kuroiwa; Michel Rossignol; Lucien Abenhaim
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-10-15       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  6 in total

1.  [Patterns of care of patients with localized prostate cancer in Germany: a health care study with focus on active surveillance].

Authors:  F K H Chun; A Becker; L A Kluth; D Seiler; D Schnell; M Fisch; M Graefen; L Weissbach
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  [Radical prostatectomy - pro robotic].

Authors:  R Gillitzer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  A comparative assessment of active surveillance for localized prostate cancer in the community versus tertiary care referral center.

Authors:  Andreas Becker; Daniel Seiler; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Luis Alex Kluth; Dietrich Schnell; Markus Graefen; Thorsten Schlomm; Margit Fisch; Franz Recker; Lothar Weissbach; Felix K H Chun
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-05-13       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  [Decision aids for patients are widely accepted by German urologists : A survey among members of the German Society of Urology (DGU) and the Federation of German Urologists (BDU)].

Authors:  C Groeben; M Baunacke; A Borkowetz; S Kliesch; C Wülfing; A Ihrig; J Huber
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 5.  [Treatment of nonmetastatic prostate cancer: a systematic review of interactive, personalized patient decision aids].

Authors:  C Groeben; J C Streuli; T Krones; B Keck; M P Wirth; J Huber
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  [Online support groups for localized prostate cancer: qualitative analysis of decision making].

Authors:  J Huber; T Peters; A Kessler; A Ihrig; C G Huber; B Hadaschik; S Pahernik; M Hohenfellner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 0.639

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.