Literature DB >> 20959991

Patient preferences and urologist recommendations among local-stage prostate cancer patients who present for initial consultation and second opinions.

Scott D Ramsey1, Steven B Zeliadt, Catherine R Fedorenko, David K Blough, Carol M Moinpour, Ingrid J Hall, Judith Lee Smith, Donatus U Ekwueme, Megan E Fairweather, Ian M Thompson, Thomas E Keane, David F Penson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study describes urologist recommendations for treatment among local-stage prostate cancer patients presenting for initial management consultations versus second opinions. We hypothesized that urologists present a wider range of management recommendations and are less likely to consider the patient preference during the initial consultation.
METHODS: Newly diagnosed local-stage prostate cancer patients and their urologists participated in a survey at urology practices in three states. The urologist's survey included questions about the patient's clinical status, treatments discussed and recommended, and factors that influenced the urologist's recommendations.
RESULTS: Of the 238 eligible patients, 95 men presented for an initial consultation, and 143 men presented for a second opinion. In multivariate analysis, urologists recommended 0.52 more treatments (standard error 0.19, P<0.001) during an initial consultation as opposed to a second opinion. The proportion recommending surgery increased from 71-91% (initial consultation versus second opinion setting). Among initial consultations, 59% had low-risk disease, and urologists' recommendations included surgery (80%), external radiation (38%), brachytherapy (seeds) (52%), and active surveillance (25%). Of the 54% with low-risk disease in a second opinion consultation, urologists' recommendations included surgery (90%), external radiation (16%), brachytherapy (14%), and active surveillance (16%).
CONCLUSIONS: In second opinion settings urologists discussed fewer treatment options and recommended surgery more often. These findings also applied to men with low-risk prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20959991     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-010-0602-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  8 in total

1.  Preliminary treatment considerations among men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  Steven B Zeliadt; Carol M Moinpour; David K Blough; David F Penson; Ingrid J Hall; Judith Lee Smith; Donatus U Ekwueme; Ian M Thompson; Thomas E Keane; Scott D Ramsey
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2010-05-01       Impact factor: 2.229

2.  Physician visits prior to treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Thomas L Jang; Justin E Bekelman; Yihai Liu; Peter B Bach; Ethan M Basch; Elena B Elkin; Michael J Zelefsky; Peter T Scardino; Colin B Begg; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2010-03-08

3.  United States radiation oncologists' and urologists' opinions about screening and treatment of prostate cancer vary by region.

Authors:  Mary McNaughton Collins; Michael J Barry; Anthony Zietman; Peter C Albertsen; James A Talcott; Elizabeth Walker Corkery; Diana B Elliott; Floyd J Fowler
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  F J Fowler; M McNaughton Collins; P C Albertsen; A Zietman; D B Elliott; M J Barry
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-06-28       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Predictors of patient preferences and treatment choices for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Benjamin D Sommers; Clair J Beard; Anthony V D'Amico; Irving Kaplan; Jerome P Richie; Richard J Zeckhauser
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 6.  Patient decision aids for prostate cancer treatment: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Grace A Lin; David S Aaronson; Sara J Knight; Peter R Carroll; R Adams Dudley
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2009-10-19       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; D Schultz; K Blank; G A Broderick; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; I Kaplan; C J Beard; A Wein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 8.  Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Roderick MacDonald; Indulis Rutks; Tatyana A Shamliyan; Brent C Taylor; Robert L Kane
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-02-04       Impact factor: 25.391

  8 in total
  22 in total

Review 1.  Is there evidence for a better health care for cancer patients after a second opinion? A systematic review.

Authors:  Dana Ruetters; Christian Keinki; Sarah Schroth; Patrick Liebl; Jutta Huebner
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 4.553

2.  Second opinions from urologists for prostate cancer: Who gets them, why, and their link to treatment.

Authors:  Archana Radhakrishnan; David Grande; Nandita Mitra; Justin Bekelman; Christian Stillson; Craig Evan Pollack
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Physician variation in management of low-risk prostate cancer: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Karen E Hoffman; Jiangong Niu; Yu Shen; Jing Jiang; John W Davis; Jeri Kim; Deborah A Kuban; George H Perkins; Jay B Shah; Grace L Smith; Robert J Volk; Thomas A Buchholz; Sharon H Giordano; Benjamin D Smith
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 21.873

4.  African-American and Caribbean-Born Men's Perceptions of Prostate Cancer Fear and Facilitators for Screening Behavior: a Pilot Study.

Authors:  Ewan K Cobran; Jori N Hall; William D Aiken
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.037

5.  Regional, provider, and economic factors associated with the choice of active surveillance in the treatment of men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ann S Hamilton; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Joseph Lipscomb; Steven T Fleming; Mary Lo; Dian Wang; Michael Goodman; Alex Ho; Jean B Owen; Chandrika Rao; Robert R German
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

6.  Factors influencing patients' acceptance and adherence to active surveillance.

Authors:  David F Penson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-12

7.  A comparison of general, genitourinary, bowel, and sexual quality of life among long term survivors of prostate, bladder, colorectal, and lung cancer.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; Ingrid J Hall; Judith Lee Smith; Donatus U Ekwueme; Catherine R Fedorenko; Karma Kreizenbeck; Aasthaa Bansal; Ian M Thompson; David F Penson
Journal:  J Geriatr Oncol       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 3.599

8.  Using a population-based observational cohort study to address difficult comparative effectiveness research questions: the CEASAR study.

Authors:  Daniel A Barocas; Vivien Chen; Matthew Cooperberg; Michael Goodman; John J Graff; Sheldon Greenfield; Ann Hamilton; Karen Hoffman; Sherrie Kaplan; Tatsuki Koyama; Alicia Morgans; Lisa E Paddock; Sharon Phillips; Matthew J Resnick; Antoinette Stroup; Xiao-Cheng Wu; David F Penson
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.744

9.  Many young men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screen-detected prostate cancers may be candidates for active surveillance.

Authors:  Jeri Kim; James Ebertowski; Matthew Janiga; Jorge Arzola; Gayle Gillespie; Michael Fountain; Douglas Soderdahl; Edith Canby-Hagino; Sally Elsamanoudi; Jennifer Gurski; John W Davis; Patricia A Parker; Douglas D Boyd
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Assessment of the status of a National Action Plan for Cancer Survivorship in the USA.

Authors:  Judith Lee Smith; Lori A Pollack; Juan L Rodriguez; Nikki A Hawkins; Tenbroeck Smith; Ruth Rechis; Andy Miller; Anne Willis; Helen Miller; Ingrid J Hall; Temeika L Fairley; Brenda Stone-Wiggins
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2013-04-23       Impact factor: 4.442

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.