scholarly journals Decision Regret and Quality of Life after Focal Therapy with Vascular-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy (TOOKAD®) for Localized Prostate Cancer

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Luka Flegar ◽  
Martin Baunacke ◽  
Bjoern Thorben Buerk ◽  
Rick Proschmann ◽  
Aristeidis Zacharis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Photodynamic Therapy ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Decision Regret ◽  
Targeted Photodynamic Therapy ◽  
Decisional Regret

<b><i>Purpose:</i></b> The aim of the study was to assess quality of life (QoL), decision involvement, and decisional regret after treatment with vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) (TOOKAD®) for unilateral low-risk prostate cancer. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25) capturing QoL post-treatment, involvement in decision-making (Control Preferences Scale) and decision regret (Decisional Regret Scale), were given to patients at the 12-month visit after undergoing VTP at our institution between May 2018 and February 2021. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Out of 44 patients, 36 patients were included in this study and 31 (86.1%) responded to the questionnaires. Mean overall health score capturing QoL at 12 months was 79.3 (standard deviation: ±18.1). 70.9% of the patients (<i>n</i> = 22) had no decision regret, and 67.8% of men (<i>n</i> = 21) had an active role in decision-making. In control biopsy at 12 months post-treatment, 19.4% of patients (<i>n</i> = 7) presented with local recurrence and progression to higher Gleason score (GS) was found in 13.8% of patients (<i>n</i> = 5). Patients (<i>n</i> = 3) presenting with tumor recurrence or progression to higher GS in control biopsy showed a significantly higher level of decision regret (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.009). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Only 9.7% of men (<i>n</i> = 3) felt a strong emotion of regret at 12 months after VTP. Level of decision regret was significantly higher in patients with local recurrence or tumor progression detected in control biopsy. QoL was stable after VTP.

scholarly journals Treatment Decision Regret Among Long-Term Survivors of Localized Prostate Cancer: Results From the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (20) ◽  
pp. 2306-2314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard M. Hoffman ◽  
Mary Lo ◽  
Jack A. Clark ◽  
Peter C. Albertsen ◽  
Michael J. Barry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Decision Regret ◽  
Long Term Survivors

Purpose To determine the demographic, clinical, decision-making, and quality-of-life factors that are associated with treatment decision regret among long-term survivors of localized prostate cancer. Patients and Methods We evaluated men who were age ≤ 75 years when diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between October 1994 and October 1995 in one of six SEER tumor registries and who completed a 15-year follow-up survey. The survey obtained demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical data and measured treatment decision regret, informed decision making, general- and disease-specific quality of life, health worry, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concern, and outlook on life. We used multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify factors associated with regret. Results We surveyed 934 participants, 69.3% of known survivors. Among the cohort, 59.1% had low-risk tumor characteristics (PSA < 10 ng/mL and Gleason score < 7), and 89.2% underwent active treatment. Overall, 14.6% expressed treatment decision regret: 8.2% of those whose disease was managed conservatively, 15.0% of those who received surgery, and 16.6% of those who underwent radiotherapy. Factors associated with regret on multivariable analysis included reporting moderate or big sexual function bother (reported by 39.0%; OR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.51 to 5.0), moderate or big bowel function bother (reported by 7.7%; OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.04 to 5.15), and PSA concern (mean score 52.8; OR, 1.01 per point change; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.02). Increasing age at diagnosis and report of having made an informed treatment decision were inversely associated with regret. Conclusion Regret was a relatively infrequently reported outcome among long-term survivors of localized prostate cancer; however, our results suggest that better informing men about treatment options, in particular, conservative treatment, might help mitigate long-term regret. These findings are timely for men with low-risk cancers who are being encouraged to consider active surveillance.

Quality of life 2 years after salvage cryosurgery for the treatment of local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiotherapy

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 472-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Robinson ◽  
Bryan J. Donnelly ◽  
Kerry Coupland ◽  
Jodi E. Siever ◽  
John C. Saliken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence

Real-world use of epic for clinical practice (EPIC-CP) to assess patient-reported prostate cancer quality of life in the clinical setting.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 18-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Chang ◽  
Arie Carneiro ◽  
Ostap Dovirak ◽  
Kimberly Taylor ◽  
Catrina Crociani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Routine Clinical Care ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Domain Scores

18 Background: Prostate cancer practitioners tend to underestimate patients’ treatment-related side effects. We developed the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) to facilitate patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessment at the point-of-care (Chang P et al, J Urol Sep 2011). We sought to demonstrate the feasibility of EPIC-CP use in routine clinical care, and to compare longitudinal patient-reported and practitioner-reported prostate cancer outcomes. Methods: We reviewed practitioner- and patient-reported HRQOL outcomes in 482 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution from 2010 to 2014. All EPIC-CP questionnaires were administered and interpreted without research personnel. Practitioner-reported outcomes were assessed using chart review. We used the paired t-test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare pre- and post-treatment EPIC-CP domain scores, and Fisher’s exact test to compare patient-reported and practitioner-reported outcomes. We considered p-values < 0.05 statistically significant. Results: 708 total EPIC-CP questionnaires were completed. Mean urinary incontinence domain scores increased (worsened) significantly from baseline (0.6±0.2) to 3 (3.1±2.3) and 6 months (2.2±2.1) post-treatment, but were not statistically changed from baseline at 12 months (1.6±1.7). Patient-reported incontinence pad-free rates using EPIC-CP at 3, 6, and 12 months were 47%, 76%, and 78%, respectively, which were consistent with practitioner-reported rates. Mean sexual domain scores were significantly worse at 12 months (5.9±3.3) compared to baseline (2.4±2.8). Practitioners significantly overestimated the rate of functional erections compared to patients’ EPIC-CP-reported rates at 3 months (18% vs 12%, p < 0.05) and 12 months (45% vs 23%, p < 0.05). Bowel and vitality/hormonal scores were unchanged, and urinary irritation/obstruction scores improved after surgery. Conclusions: EPIC-CP is feasible to use in the routine clinical care of prostate cancer patients, and can help practitioners more accurately assess patients’ post-treatment symptom severity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document