Khanh N Pham1, Jennifer Cullen2, Lauren M Hurwitz3, Erika M Wolff1, Katherine E Levie3, Katherine Odem-Davis4, John S Banerji1, Inger L Rosner5, Timothy C Brand6, James O L'Esperance7, Joseph R Sterbis8, Christopher R Porter9. 1. Virginia Mason, Seattle, Washington. 2. Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland; Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland; Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland. Electronic address: jcullen@cpdr.org. 3. Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland; Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Center for Biomedical Statistics, Seattle, Washington; Institute of Translational Health Sciences, Seattle, Washington. 5. Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland; Urology Service, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington; Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland. 7. Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland; Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, California. 8. Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland; Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, Hawaii. 9. Virginia Mason, Seattle, Washington; Center for Prostate Disease Research, Department of Defense, Rockville, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an important alternative to definitive therapy for men with low risk prostate cancer. However, the impact of active surveillance on health related quality of life compared to that in men without cancer remains unknown. In this study we evaluated health related quality of life outcomes in men on active surveillance compared to men followed after negative prostate needle biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on men who were enrolled into the Center for Prostate Disease Research Multicenter National Database and underwent prostate needle biopsy for suspicion of prostate cancer between 2007 and 2014. Health related quality of life was assessed at biopsy (baseline) and annually for up to 3 years using SF-36 and EPIC questionnaires. Health related quality of life scores were modeled using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for baseline health related quality of life, and demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1,204 men who met the initial eligibility criteria 420 had a negative prostate needle biopsy (noncancer comparison group). Among the 411 men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer 89 were on active surveillance. Longitudinal analysis revealed that for most health related quality of life subscales there were no significant differences between the groups in adjusted health related quality of life score trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: In this study most health related quality of life outcomes in patients with low risk prostate cancer on active surveillance did not differ significantly from those of men without prostate cancer. A comparison group of men with a similar risk of prostate cancer detection is critical to clarify the psychological and physical impact of active surveillance.
PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an important alternative to definitive therapy for men with low risk prostate cancer. However, the impact of active surveillance on health related quality of life compared to that in men without cancer remains unknown. In this study we evaluated health related quality of life outcomes in men on active surveillance compared to men followed after negative prostate needle biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on men who were enrolled into the Center for Prostate Disease Research Multicenter National Database and underwent prostate needle biopsy for suspicion of prostate cancer between 2007 and 2014. Health related quality of life was assessed at biopsy (baseline) and annually for up to 3 years using SF-36 and EPIC questionnaires. Health related quality of life scores were modeled using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for baseline health related quality of life, and demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1,204 men who met the initial eligibility criteria 420 had a negative prostate needle biopsy (noncancer comparison group). Among the 411 men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer 89 were on active surveillance. Longitudinal analysis revealed that for most health related quality of life subscales there were no significant differences between the groups in adjusted health related quality of life score trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: In this study most health related quality of life outcomes in patients with low risk prostate cancer on active surveillance did not differ significantly from those of men without prostate cancer. A comparison group of men with a similar risk of prostate cancer detection is critical to clarify the psychological and physical impact of active surveillance.
Authors: Richard J Rebello; Christoph Oing; Karen E Knudsen; Stacy Loeb; David C Johnson; Robert E Reiter; Silke Gillessen; Theodorus Van der Kwast; Robert G Bristow Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Claire Kim; Frances C Wright; Nicole J Look Hong; Gary Groot; Lucy Helyer; Pamela Meiers; May Lynn Quan; Robin Urquhart; Rebecca Warburton; Anna R Gagliardi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maarten Cuypers; Romy E D Lamers; Erik B Cornel; Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse; Marieke de Vries; Paul J M Kil Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-11-10 Impact factor: 3.603