David E Victorson1, Stephanie Schuette2, Benjamin D Schalet2, Shilajit D Kundu3, Brian T Helfand4, Kristian Novakovic4, Nathaniel Sufrin4, Michael McGuire4, Charles Brendler4. 1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: d-victorson@northwestern.edu. 2. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Division of Urology, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Using patient reported outcomes measures we identified the most informative set of factors associated with quality of life in a large sample of men treated for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined relationships with quality of life using FACIT (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy). We also hypothesized variables in a sample of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who represented different time points since treatment, including less than 12 months in 70, 1 to 3 years in 344, greater than 3 to 5 years in 291 and greater than 5 years in 97. Correlative measures included subscales of MAX-PC (Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer), short forms of PROMIS® and SOMS (Surgical Outcomes Measurement System), TDM-SATS (Treatment Decision-Making Satisfaction Scale) and subscales of the BFI (Big Five Inventory) of personality. RESULTS: Quality of life was significantly associated with hypothesized variables across different time cohorts. In regression models several factors accounted for most of the variability in quality of life scores depending on time since treatment, including 47%, 22%, 29% and 27% at less than 12 months, 1 to 3 years, greater than 3 to 5 years and greater than 5 years, respectively. Upon examining the unique contribution of these variables, treatment decision making satisfaction was the only variable to have a significant and unique contribution to quality of life across all 4 time cohorts (standardized coefficients 0.33, 0.27, 0.31 and 0.49, respectively, p <0.01). In the cohort with 1 to 3 years since treatment erectile function and neurotic personality style also had unique associations with quality of life (standardized coefficients 0.25 and -0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When considering the short-term and the longer term quality of life of a man after treatment for localized prostate cancer, our findings highlight the importance of treatment decision making satisfaction, erectile function and personality.
PURPOSE: Using patient reported outcomes measures we identified the most informative set of factors associated with quality of life in a large sample of men treated for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined relationships with quality of life using FACIT (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy). We also hypothesized variables in a sample of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who represented different time points since treatment, including less than 12 months in 70, 1 to 3 years in 344, greater than 3 to 5 years in 291 and greater than 5 years in 97. Correlative measures included subscales of MAX-PC (Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer), short forms of PROMIS® and SOMS (Surgical Outcomes Measurement System), TDM-SATS (Treatment Decision-Making Satisfaction Scale) and subscales of the BFI (Big Five Inventory) of personality. RESULTS: Quality of life was significantly associated with hypothesized variables across different time cohorts. In regression models several factors accounted for most of the variability in quality of life scores depending on time since treatment, including 47%, 22%, 29% and 27% at less than 12 months, 1 to 3 years, greater than 3 to 5 years and greater than 5 years, respectively. Upon examining the unique contribution of these variables, treatment decision making satisfaction was the only variable to have a significant and unique contribution to quality of life across all 4 time cohorts (standardized coefficients 0.33, 0.27, 0.31 and 0.49, respectively, p <0.01). In the cohort with 1 to 3 years since treatment erectile function and neurotic personality style also had unique associations with quality of life (standardized coefficients 0.25 and -0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: When considering the short-term and the longer term quality of life of a man after treatment for localized prostate cancer, our findings highlight the importance of treatment decision making satisfaction, erectile function and personality.
Authors: Donald S Strassberg; Suzanne M Zavodni; Paul Gardner; Christopher Dechet; Robert A Stephenson; Kelsey K Sewell Journal: Curr Urol Date: 2017-11-30
Authors: Karly M Murphy; Christina Sauer; Dershung Yang; Niina Hass; Kristian Novakovic; Brian Helfand; Robert Nadler; Benjamin D Schalet; David Victorson Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2022 Jan-Feb 01 Impact factor: 2.592
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