Fiona Crawford-Williams1, Sonja March1,2, Belinda C Goodwin1, Nicholas Ralph1,3, Daniel A Galvão4,5, Robert U Newton4,5, Suzanne K Chambers4,6,7,8, Jeff Dunn1,7,8,9. 1. Institute for Resilient Regions, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Central, Queensland, Australia. 2. School of Psychology, University of Southern Queensland, Springfield Central, Queensland, Australia. 3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia. 4. Exercise Medicine Research Institute, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia. 5. School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia. 6. Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia. 7. Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 8. Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Council Queensland, Fortitude Valley, Queensland, Australia. 9. School of Medicine, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence for interventions addressing key domains of the American Cancer Society (ACS) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Prostate Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines: health promotion, surveillance, physical side effects, psychosocial management, and care coordination. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions targeting ACS/ASCO guideline domains. All titles and abstracts were independently assessed for inclusion based on predetermined criteria. Relevant data were extracted, and assessment of methodological quality was performed. RESULTS: Forty-four systematic reviews of interventions targeting ACS prostate cancer guideline domains were included for review. Exercise and psychosocial interventions were effective for improving men's survivorship outcomes in the domains of health promotion, physical side effects, and psychosocial management. Across the domains, evidence quality varied and there was a limited diversity of participants. No reviews of interventions addressing surveillance and cancer care coordination were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantive knowledge gaps in prostate cancer survivorship research that are a barrier to real improvements in men's outcomes across the breadth of the survivorship experience. A targeted research and implementation agenda in prostate cancer survivorship is urgently needed if we are to meet the current and future burden of this disease on individuals, families, and communities.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence for interventions addressing key domains of the American Cancer Society (ACS) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Prostate Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines: health promotion, surveillance, physical side effects, psychosocial management, and care coordination. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions targeting ACS/ASCO guideline domains. All titles and abstracts were independently assessed for inclusion based on predetermined criteria. Relevant data were extracted, and assessment of methodological quality was performed. RESULTS: Forty-four systematic reviews of interventions targeting ACS prostate cancer guideline domains were included for review. Exercise and psychosocial interventions were effective for improving men's survivorship outcomes in the domains of health promotion, physical side effects, and psychosocial management. Across the domains, evidence quality varied and there was a limited diversity of participants. No reviews of interventions addressing surveillance and cancer care coordination were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantive knowledge gaps in prostate cancer survivorship research that are a barrier to real improvements in men's outcomes across the breadth of the survivorship experience. A targeted research and implementation agenda in prostate cancer survivorship is urgently needed if we are to meet the current and future burden of this disease on individuals, families, and communities.
Authors: Larissa Nekhlyudov; Michelle A Mollica; Paul B Jacobsen; Deborah K Mayer; Lawrence N Shulman; Ann M Geiger Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Amy L Clarke; Julia Roscoe; Rebecca Appleton; Deepak Parashar; Radha Muthuswamy; Omar Khan; Jeremy Dale; Veronica Nanton Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jeff Dunn; Anna Green; Nicholas Ralph; Robert U Newton; Andrew Kneebone; Mark Frydenberg; Suzanne K Chambers Journal: BJU Int Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 5.969