Netty Kinsella1, Pär Stattin2, Declan Cahill3, Christian Brown4, Anna Bill-Axelson2, Ola Bratt5, Sigrid Carlsson6, Mieke Van Hemelrijck7. 1. Translational Oncology & Urology Research (TOUR), School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. Electronic address: Netty.kinsella@rmh.nhs.uk. 2. Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 3. Department of Urology, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. 4. Department of Urology, Kings College Hospital, London, UK. 5. Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at Gothenburg University, Sweden. 6. Department of Urology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at Gothenburg University, Sweden; Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 7. Translational Oncology & Urology Research (TOUR), School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK; Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Despite support for active surveillance (AS) as a first treatment choice for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PC), this strategy is largely underutilised. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review barriers and facilitators to selecting and adhering to AS for low-risk PC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PsychINFO, PubMed, Medline 2000-now, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central databases between 2002 and 2017 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings and Significance (PREFS) and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) quality criteria were applied. Forty-seven studies were identified. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Key themes emerged as factors influencing both choice and adherence to AS: (1) patient and tumour factors (age, comorbidities, knowledge, education, socioeconomic status, family history, grade, tumour volume, and fear of progression/side effects); (2) family and social support; (3) provider (speciality, communication, and attitudes); (4) healthcare organisation (geography and type of practice); and (5) health policy (guidelines, year, and awareness). CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence men's choice and adherence to AS on multiple levels. It is important to learn from the experience of other chronic health conditions as well as from institutions/countries that are making significant headway in appropriately recruiting men to AS protocols, through standardised patient information, clinician education, and nationally agreed guidelines, to ultimately decrease heterogeneity in AS practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the scientific literature for factors affecting men's choice and adherence to active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer. Our findings suggest that the use of AS could be increased by addressing a variety of factors such as information, psychosocial support, clinician education, and standardised guidelines.
CONTEXT: Despite support for active surveillance (AS) as a first treatment choice for men with low-risk prostate cancer (PC), this strategy is largely underutilised. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review barriers and facilitators to selecting and adhering to AS for low-risk PC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PsychINFO, PubMed, Medline 2000-now, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central databases between 2002 and 2017 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings and Significance (PREFS) and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) quality criteria were applied. Forty-seven studies were identified. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Key themes emerged as factors influencing both choice and adherence to AS: (1) patient and tumour factors (age, comorbidities, knowledge, education, socioeconomic status, family history, grade, tumour volume, and fear of progression/side effects); (2) family and social support; (3) provider (speciality, communication, and attitudes); (4) healthcare organisation (geography and type of practice); and (5) health policy (guidelines, year, and awareness). CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence men's choice and adherence to AS on multiple levels. It is important to learn from the experience of other chronic health conditions as well as from institutions/countries that are making significant headway in appropriately recruiting men to AS protocols, through standardised patient information, clinician education, and nationally agreed guidelines, to ultimately decrease heterogeneity in AS practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the scientific literature for factors affecting men's choice and adherence to active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer. Our findings suggest that the use of AS could be increased by addressing a variety of factors such as information, psychosocial support, clinician education, and standardised guidelines.
Authors: Julia Wade; Peter N Holding; Susan Bonnington; Leila Rooshenas; J Athene Lane; C Elizabeth Salter; Kate Tilling; Mark J Speakman; Simon F Brewster; Simon Evans; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Jenny L Donovan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-09-18 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Peter S Kirk; Kehao Zhu; Yingye Zheng; Lisa F Newcomb; Jeannette M Schenk; James D Brooks; Peter R Carroll; Atreya Dash; William J Ellis; Christopher P Filson; Martin E Gleave; Michael Liss; Frances Martin; Jesse K McKenney; Todd M Morgan; Peter S Nelson; Ian M Thompson; Andrew A Wagner; Daniel W Lin; John L Gore Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; Lauren P Wallner; Ted A Skolarus; Vahakn B Shahinian; Paul H Abrahamse; Michael D Fetters; Sarah T Hawley Journal: Urol Pract Date: 2021-04-22
Authors: Archana Radhakrishnan; Lauren P Wallner; Ted A Skolarus; Arvin K George; Bradley H Rosenberg; Paul Abrahamse; Sarah T Hawley Journal: J Urol Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 7.600
Authors: Matthew T Hudnall; Anuj S Desai; Kyle P Tsai; Adam B Weiner; Amanda X Vo; Oliver S Ko; Stephen Jan; Edward M Schaeffer; Shilajit D Kundu Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: David Eldred-Evans; Henry Tam; Heminder Sokhi; Anwar R Padhani; Mathias Winkler; Hashim U Ahmed Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 14.432