Prostate Cancer Scientific - J

Welcome to the Prostate Cancer Guide scientific abstracts, author section J. Here you will find abstracts from the latest research being carried out in the field.

This section is recommended for people who have a scientific interest in prostate cancer. It is recommended that people without prior knowledge of prostate cancer visit the more general areas of the site (Prostate Cancer Guide).

Abstract Authors

 

Latest Prostate Cancer Abstract

Journal: BJU International.

Issue: 2006, 97(5):955-62.

Pubmed ID: 16643477

Authors: Jayadevappa R, Chhatre S, Whittington R, Bloom BS, Wein AJ, Malkowicz SB.

Title: Health-related quality of life and satisfaction with care among older men treated for prostate cancer with either radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse health-related quality of life and satisfaction with care across potential curative treatments for older patients newly diagnosed with prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective cohort study we recruited 115 older patients (> or =65 years) newly diagnosed with prostate cancer from the urology clinics of an urban academic and a Veterans' Administration (VA) hospital. Patients completed generic (Short Form-36), prostate-specific (University of California Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index) health-related quality of life, and Client Satisfaction with Care (CSQ-8) surveys before treatment with either radical prostatectomy or external beam irradiation and at 3, 6 and 12 months afterward. Clinical and demographic data were obtained via medical chart review. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine changes in generic and prostate cancer-specific health-related quality of life between treatments. Log-linear regression was used to analyse the factors associated with 12-month health-related quality of life scores, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to compare the return to baseline values for health-related quality of life.

RESULTS: The radical prostatectomy group had significantly higher income, education and better general health than the external beam irradiation group. Age (odds ratio 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.82), non-VA hospital (28.8, 2-402) and prostate-specific antigen level at diagnosis (2.8, 1.05-7.5) were associated with radical prostatectomy. The analysis results indicated that the RP group had higher scores for generic health-related quality of life subscales of physical function (P = 0.019), role emotional (P = 0.037), vitality (P = 0.033) and general health (P = 0.05) than the external beam irradiation group. A log-linear regression model for predicting the 12-month scores showed that radical prostatectomy was associated with higher scores for most of the generic health-related quality of life and bowel function (odds ratio 1.12, P = 0.03), urinary bother (1.6, P = 0.014) and bowel bother (1.5, P = 0.013). Being older was associated with a lower score on bowel function (0.98, P = 0.05) and sexual function (0.92, P = 0.05). Satisfaction with care was comparable between treatment groups at baseline and at the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS: Older patients tolerate radical prostatectomy well from the health-related quality of life perspective and thus decisions for therapy in this age cohort should not be based primarily on age.


Contact: Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-2676, USA. jravi@mail.med.upenn.edu