BACKGROUND: Combined long-term androgen deprivation (LTAD) and radiation conveys a prostate cancer-specific survival advantage over combined short-term androgen deprivation (STAD) and radiation. The seminal question is whether or not the gains are worth the adverse effects of LTAD with respect to patient preferences. METHODS: Preferences for LTAD compared with STAD were elicited by direct patient interview using the probability trade-off method. "Time trade-off utilities" (TTOu) for erectile dysfunction and osteoporosis were elicited using the time trade-off method. Participants' current prostate cancer-specific health state was assessed using the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale-Psychometric. Participants' current sexual function was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). RESULTS: All participants were willing to trade survival rather than undergo LTAD compared with STAD. The mean minimally required increment in prostate cancer-specific survival (MRIS) was 8.2%. The mean TTOu for impotence was 0.78, and the mean TTOu for osteoporosis was 0.71. The MRIS was correlated with the Sexual Desire domain score of the IIEF (Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, r = 0.50; P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients desired more prostate cancer-specific survival than what was afforded by LTAD and radiotherapy compared with STAD and radiotherapy. (c) 2010 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: Combined long-term androgen deprivation (LTAD) and radiation conveys a prostate cancer-specific survival advantage over combined short-term androgen deprivation (STAD) and radiation. The seminal question is whether or not the gains are worth the adverse effects of LTAD with respect to patient preferences. METHODS: Preferences for LTAD compared with STAD were elicited by direct patient interview using the probability trade-off method. "Time trade-off utilities" (TTOu) for erectile dysfunction and osteoporosis were elicited using the time trade-off method. Participants' current prostate cancer-specific health state was assessed using the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale-Psychometric. Participants' current sexual function was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). RESULTS: All participants were willing to trade survival rather than undergo LTAD compared with STAD. The mean minimally required increment in prostate cancer-specific survival (MRIS) was 8.2%. The mean TTOu for impotence was 0.78, and the mean TTOu for osteoporosis was 0.71. The MRIS was correlated with the Sexual Desire domain score of the IIEF (Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, r = 0.50; P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients desired more prostate cancer-specific survival than what was afforded by LTAD and radiotherapy compared with STAD and radiotherapy. (c) 2010 American Cancer Society.
Authors: William R Carpenter; Anne-Marie Meyer; Amy P Abernethy; Til Stürmer; Michael R Kosorok Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: M T King; R Viney; D P Smith; I Hossain; D Street; E Savage; S Fowler; M P Berry; M Stockler; P Cozzi; P Stricker; J Ward; B K Armstrong Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-01-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: M Keilani; T Hasenoehrl; L Baumann; R Ristl; M Schwarz; M Marhold; T Sedghi Komandj; R Crevenna Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Louis S Matza; Kristina S Boye; David H Feeny; Lee Bowman; Joseph A Johnston; Katie D Stewart; Kelly McDaniel; Jessica Jordan Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2015-11-26