It's all in the name: Does nomenclature for indolent prostate cancer impact management and anxiety?

BACKGROUND: Despite consensus guidelines, many men with low-grade prostate cancer are not managed with active surveillance. Patient perception of the nomenclature used to describe low-grade prostate cancers may partly explain this discrepancy.
METHODS: A randomized online survey was administered to men without a history of prostate cancer, presenting a hypothetical clinical scenario in which they are given a new diagnosis of low-grade prostate cancer. The authors determined whether diagnosis nomenclature was associated with management preference and diagnosis-related anxiety using ratings given on a scale from 1 to 100, adjusting for participant characteristics through multivariable linear regression.
RESULTS: The survey was completed by 718 men. Compared with Gleason 6 out of 10 prostate cancer, the term grade group 1 out of 5 prostate cancer was associated with lower preference for immediate treatment versus active surveillance (β = -9.3; 95% CI, -14.4, -4.2; P < .001), lower diagnosis-related anxiety (β = -8.3; 95% CI, -12.8, -3.8; P < .001), and lower perceived disease severity (β = -12.3; 95% CI, -16.5, -8.1; P < .001) at the time of initial diagnosis. Differences decreased as participants received more disease-specific education. Indolent lesion of epithelial origin, a suggested alternative term for indolent tumors, was not associated with differences in anxiety or preference for active surveillance.
CONCLUSIONS: Within a hypothetical clinical scenario, nomenclature for low-grade prostate cancer affects initial perception of the disease and may alter subsequent decision making, including preference for active surveillance. Disease-specific education reduces the differential impact of nomenclature use, reaffirming the importance of comprehensive counseling and clear communication between the clinician and patient.