An exploration of men's experiences of undergoing active surveillance for favourable-risk prostate cancer: A mixed methods study protocol

The psychological impact of active surveillance in men with prostate cancer: implications for nursing care

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance is a conservative management approach to treating prostate cancer involving regular testing and close monitoring by the health professional. The aim of this literature review is to establish whether men experience a psychological impact of active surveillance and what the prevalent effects might be.

METHOD

The search was carried out in three databases: CINAHL, Medline and PsycINFO. Articles published in English, from October 2015 to March 2018, which focused on the psychological impact of active surveillance, were included.

FINDINGS

A total of eight quantitative studies were included in this report. The review identified key psychological impacts of active surveillance, including anxiety, sub-clinical depression, illness uncertainty and hopelessness. Active surveillance was seen by some patients as a positive treatment approach that limited the side effects associated with active treatment.

CONCLUSION

The evidence found a negative impact of active surveillance might be felt by men at any stage during treatment and at differing levels of severity. The article highlights key demographic areas, including ethnicity and age, for future research and recommends more qualitative studies are conducted.

The Quality of Life among Men Receiving Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: An Integrative Review

Prostate cancer is very common among men in the United States. The current literature on active surveillance (AS) suggests that it is a promising treatment option for men with low-risk prostate cancer. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide a thorough integrative review regarding the effects of AS on the quality of life (QoL) of men with prostate cancer. Utilizing a methodological strategy, electronic databases were reviewed for empirical articles during the time frame of January 2006 to December 2016. A total of 37 articles met the inclusion criteria wherein 20 focused on the QoL among men only receiving AS and 16 reported QoL among men undergoing AS and other forms of treatment for prostate cancer. The review highlights the purpose, common instruments, race and ethnicity, and strengths and limitations of each article. The majority of articles indicated low levels of anxiety and depression and decreased incidences of bladder, bowel and sexual functioning among men undergoing AS in comparison to men who received other treatment modalities. The results indicated that additional research is needed to determine the QoL among men receiving AS on a longitudinal basis. The results support previous literature that indicated the positive impact of AS on low-risk prostate cancer.

Long-term follow-up after active surveillance or curative treatment: quality-of-life outcomes of men with low-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To compare long-term (4-10 years) quality of life (QoL) of men with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated by different modalities and a reference group without PCa.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, four groups were sent a one-time QoL-questionnaire; PCa patients (1) following the structured Prostate cancer Research International Active Surveillance protocol, (2) who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) in the context of the European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer-section Rotterdam, (3) who underwent radiotherapy (RT) at an academic hospital in The Netherlands, and (4) an age-matched reference group of men without PCa. The QoL-questionnaire addressed prostate-specific health (EPIC), generic health (SF-12), and anxiety (STAI-6). Statistical significance (p ≤ 0.05) and clinical relevance (≥0.5 SD) of differences between groups were assessed.

RESULTS

The AS, RP, RT, and reference group response rates amounted to 74% (122/165), 66% (70/106), 66% (221/335), and 75% (205/273), respectively. At a mean of 6.6 years of follow-up, active surveillance (AS)-men reported better urinary function [M = 93.0 (SD = 10.6) vs. 80.0 (SD = 19.1), p ≤ 0.001], less urinary incontinence [M = 90.0 (SD = 14.6) vs. 70.1 (SD = 28.8), p ≤ 0.001], and better sexual function [M = 40.9 (SD = 24.6) vs. 14.8 (17.7), p ≤ 0.001, clinically relevant] than RP-men. Compared to RT, AS-men reported better sexual function [M = 40.9 (SD = 24.6) vs. 25.8 (SD = 25.0), p = 0.069]. The four groups reported similarly low anxiety levels; the number of highly anxious men (STAI ≥ 44) ranged from 8 to 13%. For all QoL domains, men on AS and men without PCa reported very similar scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate-specific function of AS-men was significantly better than that of RP-men. When comparing AS to RT, a borderline significant difference in sexual function was seen. Men who followed an AS strategy for a long-term period were not anxious and accepted it well, suggesting that AS may be a good treatment option for men with low-risk PCa.