Treatment decision regret in long-term survivors after radical prostatectomy: a longitudinal study

Do all prostate cancer patients want, and experience shared decision making prior to curative treatment?

OBJECTIVE

In comparable men with non-metastatic prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RAD) and active surveillance (AS) are treatment options with similar survival rates, but different side-effects. Healthcare professionals consider pretreatment shared decision making (SDM) to be an essential part of medical care, though the patients' view about SDM is less known. In this article, we explore prostate cancer (PCa) patients' SDM wish (SDMwish), and experiences (SDMexp).  Material and methods: This is a registry-based survey performed by the Cancer Registry of Norway (2017-2019). One year after diagnosis, 5,063 curatively treated PCa patients responded to questions about their pre-treatment wish and experience regarding SDM. Multivariable analyses identified factors associated with SDM. Statistical significance level: p < 0.05.  Results: Overall, 78% of the patients wished to be involved in SDM and 83% of these had experienced SDM. SDMwish and SDMexp was significantly associated with decreasing age, increasing education, and living with a partner. Compared with the RP group, the probability of SDMwish and SDMexp was reduced by about 40% in the RAD and the AS groups.  Conclusion: Three of four curatively treated PCa wanted to participate in SDM, and this wish was met in four of five men. Younger PCa patients with higher education in a relationship, and opting for RP, wanted an active role in SDM, and experienced being involved. Effective SDM requires the responsible physicians' attention to the individual patients' characteristics and needs.

Patient's Desire and Real Availability Concerning Supportive Measures Accompanying Radical Prostatectomy: Differences between Certified Prostate Cancer Centers and Non-Certified Centers Based on Patient-Reported Outcomes within the Cross-Sectional Study Improve

Certification as a prostate cancer center requires the offer of several supportive measures to patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). However, it remains unclear how patients estimate the relevance of these measures and whether the availability of these measures differs between certified prostate cancer centers (CERTs) and non-certified centers (NCERTs). In 20 German urologic centers, a survey comprising questions on the relevance of 15 supportive measures was sent to 1000 patients at a median of 15 months after RP. Additionally, patients were asked to rate the availability of these measures using a four-item Likert scale. The aim of this study was to compare these ratings between CERTs and NCERTs. The response rate was 75.0%. In total, 480 patients underwent surgery in CERTs, and 270 in NCERTs. Patients rated 6/15 supportive measures as very relevant: preoperative medical counselling concerning treatment options, a preoperative briefing answering last questions, preoperative pelvic floor exercises (PFEs), postoperative PFEs, postoperative social support, and postoperative rehabilitation addressing physical fitness recovery. These ratings showed no significant difference between CERTs and NCERTs (p = 0.133-0.676). In addition, 4/9 of the remaining criteria were rated as more detailed by patients in CERTs. IMPROVE represents the first study worldwide to evaluate a patient-reported assessment of the supportive measures accompanying RP. Pertinent offers vary marginally between CERTs and NCERTs.

Trajectory of Depression among Prostate Cancer Patients: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: While psychological difficulties, such as depression, among prostate cancer patients are known, their longitudinal burden remains understudied. We assessed the burden of depression across low-, intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer groups, and the association between regret and long-term depression. Methods: Secondary analysis of data from a multi-centered randomized controlled study among localized prostate cancer patients was carried out. Assessments were performed at baseline, and at 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-up. Depression was assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. A CES-D score ≥ 16 indicates high depression. Regret was measured using the regret scale of the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC). The proportion of patients with high depression was compared over time, for each risk category. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between regret, and long-term depression after adjusting for age, race, insurance, smoking status, marital status, income, education, employment, treatment, number of people in the household and study site. Results: The study had 743 localized prostate cancer patients. Median depression scores at 6, 12 and 24 months were significantly larger than the baseline median score, overall and for the three prostate cancer risk groups. The proportion of participants with high depression increased over time for all risk groups. Higher regret at 24-month follow-up was significantly associated with high depression at 24-month follow-up, after adjusting for covariates. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of localized prostate cancer patients continued to experience long-term depression. Patient-centered survivorship care strategies can help reduce depression and regret, and improve outcomes in prostate cancer care.