Literature DB >> 7799493

Quality-of-life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer.

M S Litwin1, R D Hays, A Fink, P A Ganz, B Leake, G E Leach, R H Brook.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in men treated for clinically localized prostate cancer.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis of HRQOL after treatment with radical prostatectomy, pelvic irradiation, or observation alone for clinically localized prostatic adenocarcinoma, and in age-matched comparison patients.
SETTING: A large managed care population in California.
SUBJECTS: A total of 528 men, including 214 treated for clinically localized prostate cancer (41 with evidence of metastatic disease were excluded from this analysis) and 273 age-matched, ZIP code-matched comparison patients without prostate cancer. Cancer patients were analyzed in three treatment groups: radical prostatectomy (n = 98), primary pelvic irradiation (n = 56), and observation alone (n = 60). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: General HRQOL was measured with the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Cancer-specific HRQOL was measured with the CAncer Rehabilitation Evaluation System-Short Form and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General form. Disease-targeted quality of life was measured with a new instrument assessing function and bother in three organ systems: sexual, urinary, and bowel.
RESULTS: No differences among treatment groups were seen in comparisons of general HRQOL: Significant differences among treatment groups were seen in both function and bother in the prostate-targeted measures of sexual, urinary, and bowel domains. When cancer patients were compared with men of similar age without prostate cancer, differences were seen in the sexual, urinary, and bowel function and bother but not in general HRQOL measures. Although cancer-free men were found not to have full potency or continence, prostate cancer patients treated with surgery or radiation reported significantly worse sexual, urinary, and bowel function than men without cancer. Men who had undergone nerve-sparing prostatectomy did not differ from those who had undergone standard prostatectomy, but the power to detect a difference was low.
CONCLUSIONS: Although no differences were seen in general HRQOL, three disease-targeted domains were found to differ significantly among the treatment groups and comparison patients. Even after controlling for the sexual and urinary dysfunction experienced by older men without cancer, those receiving therapeutic interventions for their prostate cancer were found to have poorer disease-targeted HRQOL: We conclude that in addition to general HRQOL, disease-targeted measures must be used to assess outcomes of care in men treated for localized prostate cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7799493     DOI: 10.1001/jama.273.2.129

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  143 in total

1.  Carrier testing of children for two X linked diseases in a family based setting: a retrospective long term psychosocial evaluation.

Authors:  O Järvinen; A M Aalto; A E Lehesjoki; M Lindlöf; I Söderling; A Uutela; H Kääriäinen
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 6.318

2.  Exploring the efficacy of support groups for men with prostrate cancer.

Authors:  B A Weber; B L Roberts; G J McDougall
Journal:  Geriatr Nurs       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.361

3.  Men's health: are we missing the big picture?

Authors:  D Penson; J N Krieger
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Social support, intrusive thoughts, and quality of life in breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  J A Lewis; S L Manne; K N DuHamel; S M Vickburg; D H Bovbjerg; V Currie; G Winkel; W H Redd
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2001-06

5.  Prostate cancer screening: Attitudes and practices of family physicians in Ontario.

Authors:  Christopher B Allard; Shawn Dason; Janis Lusis; Anil Kapoor
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Prediction of erectile function following treatment for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Meredith M Regan; Matthew R Cooperberg; John T Wei; Jeff M Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Larry Hembroff; Natalia Sadetsky; Christopher S Saigal; Mark S Litwin; Eric Klein; Adam S Kibel; Daniel A Hamstra; Louis L Pisters; Deborah A Kuban; Irving D Kaplan; David P Wood; Jay Ciezki; Rodney L Dunn; Peter R Carroll; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Watchful waiting and quality of life among prostate cancer survivors in the Physicians' Health Study.

Authors:  Julie L Kasperzyk; William V Shappley; Stacey A Kenfield; Lorelei A Mucci; Tobias Kurth; Jing Ma; Meir J Stampfer; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Measuring illness uncertainty in men undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Donald E Bailey; Meredith Wallace; David M Latini; Josephine Hegarty; Peter R Carroll; Eric A Klein; Peter C Albertsen
Journal:  Appl Nurs Res       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 2.257

9.  Nerve-sparing technique and urinary control after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Wesley W Choi; Marcos P Freire; Jane R Soukup; Lei Yin; Stuart R Lipsitz; Fernando Carvas; Stephen B Williams; Jim C Hu
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Evaluating long-term patient-centered outcomes following prostate cancer treatment: findings from the Michigan Prostate Cancer Survivor study.

Authors:  May Darwish-Yassine; Manijeh Berenji; Diane Wing; Glenn Copeland; Raymond Y Demers; Carol Garlinghouse; Angela Fagerlin; Gail E Newth; Laurel Northouse; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; David Rovner; Jerry Sims; John T Wei
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2013-11-10       Impact factor: 4.442

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.