Incidence and Correlates of Fatigue in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review

Impact of frailty on cancer-related fatigue and quality of life in outpatients with prostate cancer: a cross-sectional study of patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prevalence of frailty and its effects on cancer-related fatigue and quality of life among patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, questionnaires were administered to 254 outpatients who visited the Department of Urology at Kagawa University Hospital for prostate cancer; finally, 108 outpatients were analyzed. Frailty, cancer-related fatigue and quality of life were assessed using the G8 screening tool, Japanese version of the Brief Fatigue Inventory and Japanese version of the Short Form 8 Health Survey, respectively. We defined frailty based on a score ≤14 points and divided the patients into frailty and no-frailty groups. We also compared the severity of cancer-related fatigue and quality of life between groups.

RESULTS

The prevalence of frailty among 108 outpatients was 63%. Older age correlated with frailty severity (P = 0.0007) but not cancer-related fatigue severity (P = 0.2391). The proportion of patients on treatment or with metastasis was not significantly different between groups. The frailty group had higher cancer-related fatigue severity (P = 0.004) and decreased levels of general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work and enjoyment of life, especially on the Brief Fatigue Inventory subscale. The frailty group had lower physical and mental quality of life than the no-frailty group or general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The frailty rate for these patients increased with age, exceeding 60% regardless of the treatment status, and was associated with worsened cancer-related fatigue severity and reduced quality of life. Our study highlights the importance of assessing frailty when selecting treatment, especially in older patients.

Management of newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: A survey of UK Uro-oncologists

AIM

To explore the practice and views of uro-oncologists in the United Kingdom regarding their use of chemotherapy and androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTAs) in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).

METHODS

An expert-devised paper or online questionnaire was completed by members of the British Uro-oncology Group.

RESULTS

All respondents stated that they would offer patients with newly diagnosed mHSPC docetaxel and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) if they were sufficiently fit to receive chemotherapy (this was the only option available at the time of the survey); 64% would strongly recommend docetaxel for those with high-volume metastatic disease and 31% for those with low-volume disease. Hypothetically, if both docetaxel and ARTAs were available in the United Kingdom for mHSPC, almost 65% of respondents would recommend an ARTA with ADT to these patients in at least one-half of all cases, with the strongest recommendations to patients with high-risk disease. Imaging for the response was conducted according to suspicion of disease progression, regardless of treatment, with the minority of clinicians recommending routine imaging. If a choice of therapy was available, docetaxel would be more likely to be offered to patients with liver or lung metastases, and ARTAs to patients with bone or lymph node only metastases. Almost all respondents would offer local radiotherapy to the primary tumour in patients with low-volume disease.

CONCLUSION

All the UK uro-oncologists surveyed stated that they would offer docetaxel in combination with ADT to all newly diagnosed patients with mHSPC if fit enough for chemotherapy. ARTAs would be offered to many patients if available, especially those with high-risk disease or those unfit to receive chemotherapy. Scanning was typically conducted following treatment only at the suspicion of disease progression.

Cumulative financial stress as a potential risk factor for cancer-related fatigue among prostate cancer survivors

Introduction

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most commonly reported treatment-related side effect of prostate cancer (PCa). Recognition of financial hardship among cancer survivors is growing. We investigated, for the first time, associations between levels of financial stress and CRF among PCa survivors.

Methods

We used data from PCa survivors who had been identified through two population-based cancer registries covering the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland and had completed a postal questionnaire. CRF was measured by the fatigue subscale of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Financial stress was assessed as household ability to make ends meet (i) pre-diagnosis and (ii) at questionnaire completion (post-diagnosis). Multivariable logistic regression was used to relate financial stress to clinically important CRF (fatigue subscale score ≥ 39 of a possible 100).

Results

Two thousand four hundred fifty-eight PCa survivors were included. Of these, 268 (10.9%) reported pre-diagnosis financial stress only, 317 (12.9%) post-diagnosis stress only and 270 (11.0%) both pre- and post-diagnosis stress (cumulative stress); 470 (19.1%) reported clinically important CRF. After controlling for confounders, survivors with cumulative financial stress exposure were significantly more likely to have CRF (OR = 4.58, 95% CI 3.30–6.35, p < 0.001), compared with those without financial stress. There was a suggestion of a dose-response relationship (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.27–2.65, p = 0.001 for pre-diagnosis financial stress only; and OR = 4.11, 95% CI 3.01–5.61, p < 0.001 for post-diagnosis financial stress only).

Conclusions

Financial stress may be an independent risk factor for CRF.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

There may be benefits in targeting interventions for reducing CRF towards survivors with financial stress, or developing strategies to reduce financial stress.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11764-020-00906-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Assessment of cancer-related fatigue among Jordanian patients: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is considered to be one of the most common symptoms reported by cancer patients. However, little information is available regarding the variables associated with CRF among Jordanian patients.

AIMS

To assess the prevalence of CRF and explore its predictors among Jordanian patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was used.

FINDINGS

Of the 240 patients surveyed, 210 (87.5%) had fatigue at the time of the survey. The total mean fatigue score was 6.2 (SD=1.7) out of a maximum possible score of 10. The results also showed that being unemployed, with longer hospitalisation, low haemoglobin, and having lung cancer seem to predict higher levels of CRF.

CONCLUSION

Several variables and factors associated with CRF were identified. In response to these results, healthcare providers should pay more attention to CRF, which needs to be assessed on a regular basis and to be managed with the available pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

PREVALENCE OF FATIGUE AND IMPACT ON QUALITY OF LIFE IN CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS: the VITAL study

Background

Fatigue is one of the most prevalent symptoms among cancer patients. Specifically, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, fatigue is the most common adverse event associated with current treatments. The purpose of this study is to describe the prevalence of fatigue and its impact on quality of life (QoL) in patients with CRPC in routine clinical practice.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, multicentre study. Male chemo-naïve adults with high-risk non-metastatic (M0) CRPC and metastatic (M1) CRPC (mCRPC) were eligible. Fatigue was measured using the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and QoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy questionnaire for patients with prostate cancer (FACT-P) and the FACT-General (FACT-G) questionnaire. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis tests (non-parametric distribution), a T-test or an ANOVA (parametric distribution) and the Fisher or chi-squared tests (categorical variables).

Results

A total of 235 eligible patients were included in the study (74 [31.5%] with M0; and 161 [68.5%] with M1). Fatigue was present in 74%, with 38.5% of patients reporting moderate-to-severe fatigue. Mean FACT-G and FACT-P overall scores were 77.6 ± 16.3 and 108.7 ± 21.4, respectively, with no differences between the CRPC M0 and CRPC M1 subgroups. Fatigue intensity was associated with decreased FACT-G/P scores, with no differences between groups. Among 151 mCRPC patients with available treatment data, those treated with abiraterone-prednisone ≥3 months showed a significant reduction in fatigue intensity (p = 0.043) and interference (p = 0.04) compared to those on traditional hormone therapy (HT). Patients on abiraterone-prednisone ≥3 months showed significantly better FACT-G/P scores than patients on HT (p = 0.046 and 0.018, respectively).

Conclusion

Our data show a high prevalence and intensity of fatigue and its impact on QoL in chemo-naïve CRPC patients. There is an association between greater fatigue and less QoL, irrespective of the presence or absence of metastasis. Chemo-naïve mCRPC patients receiving more than 3 months of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone showed an improvement of fatigue and QoL when compared to those on traditional HT.

Trial registration

Not applicable since it is not an interventional study.

Fatigue, quality of life and metabolic changes in men treated with first-line enzalutamide versus abiraterone plus prednisolone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (HEAT): a randomised trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate plus prednisolone (AAP) are used in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy to further suppress the androgen stimulation of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). First-line mCRPC treatment with enzalutamide and AAP yields similar overall survival and radiographic progression-free survival in phase III trials. Thus, treatment selection relies on patient choice, cost and side effects. The aim of this randomised trial is to investigate differences in fatigue, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and metabolic side effects in men with mCRPC treated with first-line enzalutamide versus AAP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this ongoing open-label randomised (1:1) clinical trial, enzalutamide is compared with AAP as first-line treatment for men with mCRPC. The primary endpoint is fatigue assessed with the questionnaire Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue version 4. Secondary endpoints are changes in body composition (ie, fat mass, visceral adipose tissue, subcutaneous adipose tissue and lean body mass assessed with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry), glucose metabolism assessed with a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test, serum lipids, blood pressure and HRQoL assessed with the questionnaire Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). All study endpoints are assessed at baseline and 12-week postintervention. Blood and urine samples are collected at baseline and at time of progression on allocated treatment for future investigation of predictive and prognostic biomarkers in prostate cancer treatment. The planned sample size is 170 participants. All participants are recruited from Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. Estimated last patient's last visit is February 2020.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study received project approval from the National Committee on Health Research Ethics and Danish Data Protection Agency and Danish Medicines Agency (EudraCT no.: 2017-000027-99). The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed international journals and will be presented at national and international conferences and symposiums.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrialsregister.eu (2017-000099-27).

Cognitively-Based Compassion Training versus cancer health education to improve health-related quality of life in survivors of solid tumor cancers and their informal caregivers: study protocol for a randomized controlled pilot trial

Background

Cancer survivors and their informal caregivers (family members, close friends) often experience significant impairments in health-related quality of life (HRQOL), including disruptions in psychological, physical, social, and spiritual well-being both during and after primary cancer treatment. The purpose of this in-progress pilot trial is to determine acceptability and preliminary efficacy (as reflected by effect sizes) of CBCT® (Cognitively-Based Compassion Training) compared with a cancer health education (CHE) attention control to improve the primary outcome of depressive symptoms and secondary outcomes of other HRQOL domains (e.g., anxiety, fatigue), biomarkers of inflammation and diurnal cortisol rhythm, and healthcare utilization-related outcomes in both cancer survivors and informal caregivers.

Methods

Forty dyads consisting of solid tumor survivors who have completed primary treatments (chemotherapy, radiation, surgery) and their informal caregivers, with at least one dyad member with ≥ mild depressive symptoms or anxiety, will be recruited from Tucson, Arizona, USA. Survivor-caregiver dyads will be randomized together to complete either CBCT or CHE. CBCT is a manualized, 8-week, group meditation-based intervention that starts with attention and mindfulness and builds to contemplative practices aimed at cultivating compassion to the self and others. The goal of CBCT is to challenge unexamined assumptions about feelings and behaviors, with a focus on generating spontaneous self-compassion and increased empathic responsiveness and compassion for others. CHE is an 8-week, manualized group intervention that provides cancer-specific education on various topics (e.g., cancer advocacy, survivorship wellness). Patient-reported HRQOL outcomes will be assessed before, immediately after (week 9), and 1 month after CBCT or CHE (week 13). At the same time points, stress-related biomarkers of inflammation (e.g., plasma interleukin-6) and saliva cortisol relevant for survivor and informal caregiver wellness and healthcare utilization will be measured.

Discussion

If CBCT shows acceptability, a larger trial will be warranted and appropriately powered to formally test the efficacy of this dyadic intervention. Interventions such as CBCT directed toward both survivors and caregivers may eventually fill a gap in supportive oncology care programs to improve HRQOL and healthcare utilization in both dyad members.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03459781. Prospectively registered on 9 March 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3320-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Incidence of fatigue and low-dose corticosteroid use in prostate cancer patients receiving systemic treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a complex condition that is reported in > 50% of cancer patients. In men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), CRF was reported in 12-21% of patients. Approved systemic therapy against CRPC is commonly administered in combination with androgen-deprivation treatment (ADT) and, in some cases, with daily, low-dose corticosteroids. Importantly, the use of low-dose corticosteroids is associated with multiple negative effects, including reduced muscle mass. On these grounds, we hypothesized that the chronic use of corticosteroids may increase the incidence of fatigue in patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed all randomized trials published during the last 15 years conducted in patients with prostate cancer receiving systemic treatment and we performed a sub-group analysis to gather insights regarding the potential differences in the incidence of fatigue in patients receiving vs. not receiving daily corticosteroids as part of their systemic anti-neoplastic regimen.

RESULTS

Overall, 22,734 men enrolled in prospective randomized phase II and III trials were evaluable for fatigue. Estimated pooled incidence of grade 1-2 fatigue was 30.89% (95% CI = 25.34-36.74), while estimated pooled incidence of grade 3-4 fatigue was reported in 3.90% (95% CI = 2.91-5.02). Sub-group analysis showed that grade 3-4 fatigue was approximately double in patients who received daily corticosteroids as part of their anti-neoplastic treatment (5.58; 95% CI = 4.33-6.98) vs. those who did not (2.67%; 95% CI = 1.53-4.11).

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the need for ad hoc-designed prospective clinical trials to investigate whether the benefits associated with low-dose, daily corticosteroids outweigh the risks associated with corticosteroid-related adverse events such as fatigue.

Patients' Preferences for the Treatment of Metastatic Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Patient treatment preferences are increasingly being used to inform health care decision making. This discrete choice experiment assessed how men perceive the risks and benefits of hypothetical treatment options for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODS

Treatment attributes for inclusion were identified through a review of the literature and product labels. Expert interviews confirmed clinical appropriateness and patient relevance of the attributes, which included effectiveness (delay in months before chemotherapy), steroid use, possible drug interactions (additional hospital visits for monitoring), fogginess (effects on cognition and memory), fatigue (extreme tiredness), food restrictions, and bone pain. Following a pilot, the final discrete choice experiment included 18 choice sets presenting treatments for mCRPC and was completed by men with mCRPC in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Data were analyzed using a conditional logit model, with odds ratios (ORs) used to indicate preference for attributes, and tradeoff measures (TOM) were estimated using the ratio of coefficients.

FINDINGS

Within each attribute category and with all other factors being equal, participants (N = 285) indicated a strong preference for treatments that fully control bone pain (OR = 12.069 [95% CI, 10.555-13.800]) and for treatments that delay chemotherapy (OR, 1.727 [95% CI, 1.548-1.927]). They also preferred treatments that were associated with the lowest risk of fogginess (OR, 2.115 [95% CI, 1.849-2.420]), a lower risk of fatigue (OR, 1.365 [95% CI 1.219-1.528]), and fewer additional hospital visits (OR, 1.245 [95% CI 1.111-1.397]) than the respective reference categories. Participants preferred to use steroids under advice from a physician (OR, 1.275 [95% CI 1.132-1.437]). Food restrictions related to taking medication were not a significant concern for participants. TOM results indicated that large tradeoffs in effectiveness, fogginess, and fatigue are required for patients to prefer a treatment with uncontrolled bone pain that is very difficult to live with.

IMPLICATIONS

Men with mCRPC consider a wide range of factors when making decisions regarding their treatment. They showed a strong preference for treatment associated with better control of bone pain. They also placed value on treatments that could delay the need for chemotherapy, and they preferred to avoid side effects such as cognition and memory loss, and extreme tiredness. TOMs highlighted the importance of symptom control, even compared with potential side effects. An understanding of the degree to which patients value the attributes associated with various treatment options will assist clinicians and health care professionals when making decisions regarding the management of men with mCRPC.