Michael Lardas1, Matthew Liew2, Roderick C van den Bergh3, Maria De Santis4, Joaquim Bellmunt5, Thomas Van den Broeck6, Philip Cornford7, Marcus G Cumberbatch8, Nicola Fossati9, Tobias Gross10, Ann M Henry11, Michel Bolla12, Erik Briers13, Steven Joniau14, Thomas B Lam15, Malcolm D Mason16, Nicolas Mottet17, Henk G van der Poel3, Olivier Rouvière18, Ivo G Schoots19, Thomas Wiegel20, Peter-Paul M Willemse21, Cathy Yuhong Yuan22, Liam Bourke23. 1. Department of Urology, Leto Hospital, Athens, Greece. 2. Department of Urology, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, UK. 3. Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, UK; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. 5. Bladder Cancer Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Molecular Endocrinology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 7. Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. 8. Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 9. Unit of Urology/Division of Oncology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. 10. Department of Urology, University of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland. 11. Leeds Cancer Centre, St. James's University Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 12. Department of Radiation Therapy, CHU Grenoble, Grenoble, France. 13. Hasselt, Belgium. 14. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 15. Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK. 16. Wales Cancer Bank, Cardiff University, School of Medicine, Health Park, Cardiff, UK. 17. Department of Urology, University Hospital, St. Etienne, France. 18. Hospices Civils de Lyon, Radiology Department, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France. 19. Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 20. Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany. 21. Department of Urology, University Hospital Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 22. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 23. Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK. Electronic address: l.bourke@shu.ac.uk.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Current evidence-based management for clinically localised prostate cancer includes active surveillance, surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy. The impact of these treatment modalities on quality of life (QoL) is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review comparative studies investigating disease-specific QoL outcomes as assessed by validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures with at least 1 yr of follow-up after primary treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were critically appraised for the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 11486 articles identified, 18 studies were eligible for inclusion, including three randomised controlled trials (RCTs; follow-up range: 60-72 mo) and 15 nonrandomised comparative studies (follow-up range: 12-180 mo) recruiting a total of 13604 patients. Two RCTs recruited small cohorts and only one was judged to have a low risk of bias. The quality of evidence from observational studies was low to moderate. For a follow-up of up to 6 yr, active surveillance was found to have the lowest impact on cancer-specific QoL, surgery had a negative impact on urinary and sexual function when compared with active surveillance and EBRT, and EBRT had a negative impact on bowel function when compared with active surveillance and surgery. Data from one small RCT reported that brachytherapy has a negative impact on urinary function 1 yr post-treatment, but no significant urinary toxicity was reported at 5 yr. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review comparing the impact of different primary treatments on cancer-specific QoL for men with clinically localised prostate cancer, using validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures only. There is robust evidence that choice of primary treatment for localised prostate cancer has distinct impacts on patients' QoL. This should be discussed in detail with patients during pretreatment counselling. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our review of the current evidence suggests that for a period of up to 6 yr after treatment, men with localised prostate cancer who were managed with active surveillance reported high levels of quality of life (QoL). Men treated with surgery reported mainly urinary and sexual problems, while those treated with external beam radiotherapy reported mainly bowel problems. Men eligible for brachytherapy reported urinary problems up to a year after therapy, but then their QoL returned gradually to as it was before treatment.
CONTEXT: Current evidence-based management for clinically localised prostate cancer includes active surveillance, surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy. The impact of these treatment modalities on quality of life (QoL) is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review comparative studies investigating disease-specific QoL outcomes as assessed by validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures with at least 1 yr of follow-up after primary treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were critically appraised for the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was undertaken. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 11486 articles identified, 18 studies were eligible for inclusion, including three randomised controlled trials (RCTs; follow-up range: 60-72 mo) and 15 nonrandomised comparative studies (follow-up range: 12-180 mo) recruiting a total of 13604 patients. Two RCTs recruited small cohorts and only one was judged to have a low risk of bias. The quality of evidence from observational studies was low to moderate. For a follow-up of up to 6 yr, active surveillance was found to have the lowest impact on cancer-specific QoL, surgery had a negative impact on urinary and sexual function when compared with active surveillance and EBRT, and EBRT had a negative impact on bowel function when compared with active surveillance and surgery. Data from one small RCT reported that brachytherapy has a negative impact on urinary function 1 yr post-treatment, but no significant urinary toxicity was reported at 5 yr. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review comparing the impact of different primary treatments on cancer-specific QoL for men with clinically localised prostate cancer, using validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures only. There is robust evidence that choice of primary treatment for localised prostate cancer has distinct impacts on patients' QoL. This should be discussed in detail with patients during pretreatment counselling. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our review of the current evidence suggests that for a period of up to 6 yr after treatment, men with localised prostate cancer who were managed with active surveillance reported high levels of quality of life (QoL). Men treated with surgery reported mainly urinary and sexual problems, while those treated with external beam radiotherapy reported mainly bowel problems. Men eligible for brachytherapy reported urinary problems up to a year after therapy, but then their QoL returned gradually to as it was before treatment.
Authors: Elizabeth J Polter; Nidhi Kohli; B R Simon Rosser; Kristine M C Talley; Christopher W Wheldon; Chris J Hoefer; Morgan Wright; Ryan Haggart; Darry Mitteldorf; Gudrun Kilian; Badrinath R Konety; Michael W Ross; William West Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Cristina Maranto; Vindhya Udhane; David T Hoang; Lei Gu; Vitali Alexeev; Kareem Malas; Karmel Cardenas; Jonathan R Brody; Ulrich Rodeck; Carmen Bergom; Ken A Iczkowski; Ken Jacobsohn; William See; Sara M Schmitt; Marja T Nevalainen Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Marco Bandini; Michele Marchioni; Felix Preisser; Emanuele Zaffuto; Zhe Tian; Derya Tilki; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Fred Saad; Alberto Briganti; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-05-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Dominic H Moon; Ram S Basak; Deborah S Usinger; Gregg A Dickerson; David E Morris; Mark Perman; Maili Lim; Turner Wibbelsman; Jerry Chang; Zachary Crawford; James R Broughman; Paul A Godley; Ronald C Chen Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2019-03-08 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Amir H Lebastchi; Arvin K George; Thomas J Polascik; Jonathan Coleman; Jean de la Rosette; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Michael A Gorin; Abhinav Sidana; Sangeet Ghai; Kae Jack Tay; John F Ward; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Berrend G Muller; Bernard Malavaud; Pierre Mozer; Sebastien Crouzet; Peter L Choyke; Osamu Ukimura; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Peter A Pinto Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 20.096