Heather Orom1, Caitlin Biddle2, Willie Underwood3, Gregory G Homish2, Carl A Olsson4. 1. University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. Electronic address: horom@buffalo.edu. 2. University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY. 3. Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY. 4. Integrated Medical Professionals, Melville, NY; Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a prospective study to examine whether there are pretreatment and post-treatment disparities in urinary, sexual, and bowel quality of life (QOL) by race or ethnicity, education, or income in men with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa.) METHODS: Participants (N = 1508; 81% white; 12% black; 7% Hispanic; 50% surgery; 27% radiotherapy; 23% active surveillance) completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measure of PCa-specific QOL prior to treatment, 6 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. We analyzed pretreatment differences in QOL with multivariable linear regression and post-treatment differences with generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: Blacks and Hispanics (compared with whites) and men with lower income had worse pretreatment urinary function; poorer and less educated men had worse pretreatment sexual function (P < .05). In adjusted models, among men treated surgically, blacks and Hispanics had worse bowel function compared with whites, and men with lower income experienced more sexual bother and slower recovery in urinary function. Not all racial or ethnic differences favored whites; blacks had higher sexual function than whites prior to surgery and improved faster after surgery. Blacks receiving radiotherapy had lower post-treatment bowel bother than whites (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Controlling for baseline QOL, there were some post-treatment disparities in urinary and sexual QOL that suggest the need to investigate whether treatment quality and access to follow-up care is equitable. However, survivorship disparities may, to a greater extent, reflect disadvantages in baseline health that exacerbate QOL issues after treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a prospective study to examine whether there are pretreatment and post-treatment disparities in urinary, sexual, and bowel quality of life (QOL) by race or ethnicity, education, or income in men with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa.) METHODS:Participants (N = 1508; 81% white; 12% black; 7% Hispanic; 50% surgery; 27% radiotherapy; 23% active surveillance) completed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite measure of PCa-specific QOL prior to treatment, 6 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. We analyzed pretreatment differences in QOL with multivariable linear regression and post-treatment differences with generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: Blacks and Hispanics (compared with whites) and men with lower income had worse pretreatment urinary function; poorer and less educated men had worse pretreatment sexual function (P < .05). In adjusted models, among men treated surgically, blacks and Hispanics had worse bowel function compared with whites, and men with lower income experienced more sexual bother and slower recovery in urinary function. Not all racial or ethnic differences favored whites; blacks had higher sexual function than whites prior to surgery and improved faster after surgery. Blacks receiving radiotherapy had lower post-treatment bowel bother than whites (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Controlling for baseline QOL, there were some post-treatment disparities in urinary and sexual QOL that suggest the need to investigate whether treatment quality and access to follow-up care is equitable. However, survivorship disparities may, to a greater extent, reflect disadvantages in baseline health that exacerbate QOL issues after treatment.
Authors: Florian R Schroeck; Tracey L Krupski; Leon Sun; David M Albala; Marva M Price; Thomas J Polascik; Cary N Robertson; Alok K Tewari; Judd W Moul Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-06-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: David F Penson; Dale McLerran; Ziding Feng; Lin Li; Peter C Albertsen; Frank D Gilliland; Ann Hamilton; Richard M Hoffman; Robert A Stephenson; Arnold L Potosky; Janet L Stanford Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Darrell J Gaskin; Roland J Thorpe; Emma E McGinty; Kelly Bower; Charles Rohde; J Hunter Young; Thomas A LaVeist; Lisa Dubay Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-11-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Alex J Bates; B R Simon Rosser; Elizabeth J Polter; Christopher W Wheldon; Kristine M C Talley; Ryan Haggart; Morgan Wright; Darryl Mitteldorf; William West; Michael W Ross; Badrinath R Konety; Nidhi Kohli Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Valentina A Zavala; Paige M Bracci; John M Carethers; Luis Carvajal-Carmona; Nicole B Coggins; Marcia R Cruz-Correa; Melissa Davis; Adam J de Smith; Julie Dutil; Jane C Figueiredo; Rena Fox; Kristi D Graves; Scarlett Lin Gomez; Andrea Llera; Susan L Neuhausen; Lisa Newman; Tung Nguyen; Julie R Palmer; Nynikka R Palmer; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Sorbarikor Piawah; Erik J Rodriquez; María Carolina Sanabria-Salas; Stephanie L Schmit; Silvia J Serrano-Gomez; Mariana C Stern; Jeffrey Weitzel; Jun J Yang; Jovanny Zabaleta; Elad Ziv; Laura Fejerman Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 9.075