Bruce L Jacobs1,2, Samia H Lopa3, Jonathan G Yabes4,5, Joel B Nelson3, Amber E Barnato4,5,6, Howard B Degenholtz6. 1. Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. jacobsbl2@upmc.edu. 2. Center for Research on Health Care, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. jacobsbl2@upmc.edu. 3. Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Center for Research on Health Care, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 5. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 6. Department of Health Policy Management, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are several effective treatments for prostate cancer. To what extent a patient's functional status influences the treatment decision is unknown. This study examined the association between functional status and treatment among older men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey data were used to identify men who were 65 years old or older and were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1998 and 2009. The primary outcome was treatment choice: conservative management, surgery, or radiation within 1 year of the diagnosis. The exposure was the functional status assessed as 4 measures within 3 domains: 1) physical function (activities of daily living [ADLs] and physical component summary score), 2) cognitive function (survey completer: self vs proxy), and 3) emotional well-being (mental component summary score). A multivariate, multinomial logistic regression was fitted with adjustments for several patient, tumor, and regional characteristics. RESULTS: This study identified 508 conservative management patients, 195 surgery patients, and 603 radiation patients. Compared with men with no ADL dependency, those with any ADL dependency had lower odds of receiving surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.99) or radiation (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.78) versus conservative management. ADL dependency did not differ when surgery and radiation were compared. Patients with a proxy survey response were less likely to receive surgery or radiation versus conservative management. CONCLUSIONS: Functional status is associated with treatment choice for men with prostate cancer. Future research should examine whether this is due to physician recommendations, patient preferences, or a combination. Cancer 2016;122:3199-206.
BACKGROUND: There are several effective treatments for prostate cancer. To what extent a patient's functional status influences the treatment decision is unknown. This study examined the association between functional status and treatment among older men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey data were used to identify men who were 65 years old or older and were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1998 and 2009. The primary outcome was treatment choice: conservative management, surgery, or radiation within 1 year of the diagnosis. The exposure was the functional status assessed as 4 measures within 3 domains: 1) physical function (activities of daily living [ADLs] and physical component summary score), 2) cognitive function (survey completer: self vs proxy), and 3) emotional well-being (mental component summary score). A multivariate, multinomial logistic regression was fitted with adjustments for several patient, tumor, and regional characteristics. RESULTS: This study identified 508 conservative management patients, 195 surgery patients, and 603 radiation patients. Compared with men with no ADL dependency, those with any ADL dependency had lower odds of receiving surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.99) or radiation (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.78) versus conservative management. ADL dependency did not differ when surgery and radiation were compared. Patients with a proxy survey response were less likely to receive surgery or radiation versus conservative management. CONCLUSIONS: Functional status is associated with treatment choice for men with prostate cancer. Future research should examine whether this is due to physician recommendations, patient preferences, or a combination. Cancer 2016;122:3199-206.
Authors: James Mohler; Robert R Bahnson; Barry Boston; J Erik Busby; Anthony D'Amico; James A Eastham; Charles A Enke; Daniel George; Eric Mark Horwitz; Robert P Huben; Philip Kantoff; Mark Kawachi; Michael Kuettel; Paul H Lange; Gary Macvicar; Elizabeth R Plimack; Julio M Pow-Sang; Mack Roach; Eric Rohren; Bruce J Roth; Dennis C Shrieve; Matthew R Smith; Sandy Srinivas; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Patrick C Walsh Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Jean-Pierre Droz; Lodovico Balducci; Michel Bolla; Mark Emberton; John M Fitzpatrick; Steven Joniau; Michael W Kattan; Silvio Monfardini; Judd W Moul; Arash Naeim; Hendrik van Poppel; Fred Saad; Cora N Sternberg Journal: Crit Rev Oncol Hematol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Beth Hartman Ellis; Wade M Bannister; Jacquilyn Kay Cox; Brenda M Fowler; Erin Dowd Shannon; David Drachman; Randall W Adams; Laura A Giordano Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2003-09-18 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Melisa L Wong; Steven M Paul; Judy Mastick; Christine Ritchie; Michael A Steinman; Louise C Walter; Christine Miaskowski Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Ton Wang; Alison Baskin; Jacquelyn Miller; Allan Metz; Niki Matusko; Tasha Hughes; Michael Sabel; Jacqueline S Jeruss; Lesly A Dossett Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-07-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Rebecca Roth; Sebastian Dieng; Alisa Oesterle; Günter Feick; Günther Carl; Andreas Hinkel; Thomas Steiner; Björn Theodor Kaftan; Frank Kunath; Boris Hadaschik; Simba-Joshua Oostdam; Rein Jüri Palisaar; Mateusz Koralewski; Burkhard Beyer; Björn Haben; Igor Tsaur; Simone Wesselmann; Christoph Kowalski Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 4.226