BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy (RP) and percutaneous radiotherapy (RT) are viable options for the primary treatment of localized prostate cancer (PC). Given the comparable efficacy of both modalities quality of life (QOL) has been suggested as an additional decision criterion. In recent years several validated instruments have been introduced to assess QOL. Most of them allow for patient-based rating of QOL. AIM: Herein, we aim to compare QOL after RP and RT in our own cohort of patients in Tübingen using validated questionnaires. METHODS: In total, 165 patients who had been treated for PC in Tübingen were enrolled. Of those 100 men had RP and 65 had RT. The validated QOL questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-PR 25 were used for assessment. Statistical analyses focused on analyses of variance. RESULTS: Concordant to previous studies it could be shown that RP mainly creates voiding problems most importantly urinary incontinence but also erectile dysfunction. After RT, patients mainly complained about disturbed bowel function including diarrhea and proctitis as well as about urgency and frequency. RP patients had better PF2 Scale values than RT patients (p= 0.00357143). On DI scales RT patients yielded significantly poorer values than the RP group (p= 0.003333). CONCLUSION: Our data comply well with those from other international centers. QOL is an important yet underestimated variable in oncological research. Our investigations underline the importance of an interdisciplinary approach for the successful management of PC.
BACKGROUND: Radical prostatectomy (RP) and percutaneous radiotherapy (RT) are viable options for the primary treatment of localized prostate cancer (PC). Given the comparable efficacy of both modalities quality of life (QOL) has been suggested as an additional decision criterion. In recent years several validated instruments have been introduced to assess QOL. Most of them allow for patient-based rating of QOL. AIM: Herein, we aim to compare QOL after RP and RT in our own cohort of patients in Tübingen using validated questionnaires. METHODS: In total, 165 patients who had been treated for PC in Tübingen were enrolled. Of those 100 men had RP and 65 had RT. The validated QOL questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-PR 25 were used for assessment. Statistical analyses focused on analyses of variance. RESULTS: Concordant to previous studies it could be shown that RP mainly creates voiding problems most importantly urinary incontinence but also erectile dysfunction. After RT, patients mainly complained about disturbed bowel function including diarrhea and proctitis as well as about urgency and frequency. RP patients had better PF2 Scale values than RT patients (p= 0.00357143). On DI scales RT patients yielded significantly poorer values than the RP group (p= 0.003333). CONCLUSION: Our data comply well with those from other international centers. QOL is an important yet underestimated variable in oncological research. Our investigations underline the importance of an interdisciplinary approach for the successful management of PC.
Authors: K Bjordal; M Ahlner-Elmqvist; E Hammerlid; M Boysen; J F Evensen; A Biörklund; M Jannert; T Westin; S Kaasa Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: J A Talcott; P Rieker; J A Clark; K J Propert; J C Weeks; C J Beard; K I Wishnow; I Kaplan; K R Loughlin; J P Richie; P W Kantoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506