scholarly journals Watchful Waiting as a Treatment Option for Localized Prostate Cancer in the PSA Era

2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Kakehi
2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. 899-907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacy Loeb ◽  
Qinlian Zhou ◽  
Uwe Siebert ◽  
Ursula Rochau ◽  
Beate Jahn ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 22-22
Author(s):  
Luca Afferi ◽  
Stefania Zamboni ◽  
Philipp Baumeister ◽  
Livio Mordasini ◽  
Agostino Mattei ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 159 (5) ◽  
pp. 1431-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
GARY D. STEINBERG ◽  
GREGORY T. BALES ◽  
CHARLES B. BRENDLER

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 215-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Mollica ◽  
Lisa M Lines ◽  
Timothy S. McNeel ◽  
Serban Negoita ◽  
Sarah Gaillot ◽  
...  

215 Background: Over 161,000 new prostate cancer patients diagnosed annually, with 75% diagnosed at early stages. Limited evidence exists supporting choice of treatment (including radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, active surveillance or watchful waiting) for localized prostate cancer. Treatments have varying side effects associated with impaired functional status and health-related quality of life. Patient care experiences are important quality indicators, but research examining patient experiences by prostate cancer treatment is limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between treatment received (surgery, radiation, or no treatment) and CAHPS ratings of overall care over the prior six months. Methods: This study used data from SEER-CAHPS, which links Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data with Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) patient experience survey and Medicare claims data. Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries ≥65 years with a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer diagnosis were assigned to surgery only, radiation only, and no treatment received groups for analysis. The outcome variable was a CAHPS rating of overall care (0 = worst; 10 = best). The analysis adjusted for case mix and other cancer-specific variables. Results: The final cohort included 507 prostate cancer survivors (surgery n = 109 [21%]; radiation n = 197 [39%]; no treatment n = 201 [40%]). Respondents who received radiation rated their overall care higher than those not receiving treatment (adjusted mean 8.9 vs 8.3; p= 0.02). Ratings did not differ significantly between the surgery and no treatment groups. Conclusions: This study represents a first look at patient experiences among localized prostate cancer survivors receiving surgery, radiation, or no treatment. It is not clear whether those who did not receive treatment chose active surveillance or watchful waiting, or whether they did not have access to care, which could have affected results. Future research should explore associations between receipt of treatment and patient care experiences in an adequately powered sample to inform future interventions.


2008 ◽  
Vol 179 (5S) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelley A. Arredondo ◽  
Tracy M. Downs ◽  
Deborah P. Lubeck ◽  
David J. Pasta ◽  
Stefanie J. Silva ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 170 (5) ◽  
pp. 1804-1807 ◽  
Author(s):  
SUSAN R. HARLAN ◽  
MATTHEW R. COOPERBERG ◽  
ERIC P. ELKIN ◽  
DEBORAH P. LUBECK ◽  
MAXWELL V. MENG ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 171 (3) ◽  
pp. 1111-1116 ◽  
Author(s):  
HONGYAN WU ◽  
LEON SUN ◽  
JUDD W. MOUL ◽  
HONGYU WU ◽  
DAVID G. McLEOD ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document