Guidelines for Sexual Health Care for Prostate Cancer Patients: Recommendations of an International Panel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with prostate cancer suffer significant sexual dysfunction after treatment which negatively affects them and their partners psychologically, and strain their relationships. AIM: We convened an international panel with the aim of developing guidelines that will inform clinicians, patients and partners about the impact of prostate cancer therapies (PCT) on patients' and partners' sexual health, their relationships, and about biopsychosocial rehabilitation in prostate cancer (PC) survivorship. METHODS: The guidelines panel included international expert researchers and clinicians, and a guideline methodologist. A systematic review of the literature, using the Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsychINFO, LGBT Life, and Embase databases was conducted (1995-2022) according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Study selection was based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Each statement was assigned an evidence strength (A-C) and a recommendation level (strong, moderate, conditional) based on benefit/risk assessment, according to the nomenclature of the American Urological Association (AUA). Data synthesis included meta-analyses of studies deemed of sufficient quality (3), using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). OUTCOMES: Guidelines for sexual health care for patients with prostate cancer were developed, based on available evidence and the expertise of the international panel. RESULTS: The guidelines account for patients' cultural, ethnic, and racial diversity. They attend to the unique needs of individuals with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. The guidelines are based on literature review, a theoretical model of sexual recovery after PCT, and 6 principles that promote clinician-initiated discussion of realistic expectations of sexual outcomes and mitigation of sexual side-effects through biopsychosocial rehabilitation. Forty-seven statements address the psychosexual, relationship, and functional domains in addition to statements on lifestyle modification, assessment, provider education, and systemic challenges to providing sexual health care in PC survivorship. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The guidelines provide clinicians with a comprehensive approach to sexual health care for patients with prostate cancer. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: The strength of the study is the comprehensive evaluation of existing evidence on sexual dysfunction and rehabilitation in prostate cancer that can, along with available expert knowledge, best undergird clinical practice. Limitation is the variation in the evidence supporting interventions and the lack of research on issues facing patients with prostate cancer in low and middle-income countries. CONCLUSION: The guidelines document the distressing sexual sequelae of PCT, provide evidence-based recommendations for sexual rehabilitation and outline areas for future research. Wittmann D, Mehta A, McCaughan E, et al. Guidelines for Sexual Health Care for Prostate Cancer Patients: Recommendations of an International Panel. J Sex Med 2022;19:1655-1669.

Quality of Life of Prostate Cancer Survivors Participating in a Remotely Delivered Web-Based Behavioral Intervention Pilot Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Following a prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis, treatment-related symptoms may result in diminished quality of life (QoL). Improved diet and increased exercise may improve QoL in men with PC. METHODS: We conducted a 4-arm pilot randomized trial to assess feasibility and acceptability of a 3-month web-based diet and exercise intervention, among men (>18 years of age) with PC (reported elsewhere). The purpose of this study is to describe the change in QoL measured by surveys (eg, QLQ-C30, PROMIS Fatigue) at enrollment and following the intervention. Men were randomized 1:1:1:1 to increasing levels of web-based behavioral support: Level 1: website; Level 2: Level 1 plus personalized diet and exercise prescription; Level 3: Levels 1-2 plus Fitbit and text messages; Level 4: Levels 1-3 plus 2 30-minute coaching calls. T-tests were used to compare pre-post change in mean QoL scores between each Level and Level 1. RESULTS: Two hundred and two men consented and were randomized (n = 49, 51, 50, 52 for Levels 1-4, respectively). Men were predominantly white (93%), with a median age of 70 years (Intra-quartile Range [IQR]: 65,75) and 3 years (IQR: 1,9) post primary treatment for mostly localized disease (74% with T1-2). There were no meaningful changes in QoL, but there were notable trends. Level 3 participants had small improvements in QLQ-C30 Global Health (5.46; 95% CI: -0.02, 10.95) compared to Level 1. In contrast, Level 2 participants trended toward decreasing Global QoL (-2.31, 95% CI: -8.05, 3.42), which may reflect declines in function (eg, Cognitive: -6.94, 95% CI: -13.76, -0.13) and higher symptom burden (eg, Diarrhea: 4.63, 95% CI: -1.48, 10.74). CONCLUSIONS: This short, web-based intervention did not appear to have an impact on PC survivors' QoL. Most men were several years past treatment for localized disease; the potential for this approach to reduce symptoms and improve QoL in men who have worse health may still be warranted.

TrueNTH Sexual Recovery Intervention for couples coping with prostate cancer: Randomized controlled trial results.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant sexual dysfunction and distress after localized prostate cancer treatment, patients typically receive only physiologic erectile dysfunction management. The authors performed a randomized controlled trial of an online intervention supporting couples' posttreatment recovery of sexual intimacy. METHODS: Patients treated with surgery, radiation, or combined radiation and androgen deprivation therapy who had partners were recruited and randomized to an online intervention or a control group. The intervention, tailored to treatment type and sexual orientation, comprised 6 modules addressing expectations for sexual and emotional sequelae of treatment, rehabilitation, and guidance toward sexual intimacy recovery. Couples, recruited from 6 sites nationally, completed validated measures at the baseline and 3 and 6 months after treatment. Primary outcome group differences were assessed with t tests for individual outcomes. RESULTS: Among 142 randomized couples, 105 patients (mostly surgery) and 87 partners completed the 6-month survey; this reflected challenges with recruitment and attrition. There were no differences between the intervention and control arms in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Satisfaction With Sex Life scores 6 months after treatment (the primary outcome). Three months after treatment, intervention patients and partners reported more engagement in penetrative and nonpenetrative sexual activities than controls. More than 73% of the intervention participants reported high or moderate satisfaction with module content; more than 85% would recommend the intervention to other couples. CONCLUSIONS: Online psychosexual support for couples can help couples to connect and experience sexual pleasure early after treatment despite patients' sexual dysfunction. Participants' high endorsement of the intervention reflects the importance of sexual health support to couples after prostate cancer treatment. LAY SUMMARY: This study tested a web-based program supporting couples' sexual recovery of sexual intimacy after prostate cancer treatment. One hundred forty-two couples were recruited and randomly assigned to the program (n = 60) or to a control group (n = 82). The program did not result in improvements in participants' satisfaction with their sex life 6 months after treatment, but couples in the intervention group engaged in sexual activity sooner after treatment than couples in the control group. Couples evaluated the program positively and would recommend it to others facing prostate cancer treatment.

Tackling Diversity in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials: A Report From the Diversity Working Group of the IRONMAN Registry.

Prostate cancer disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minority populations. Reasons for disparate outcomes among minority patients are multifaceted and complex, involving factors at the patient, provider, and system levels. Although advancements in our understanding of disease biology have led to novel therapeutics for men with advanced prostate cancer, including the introduction of biomarker-driven therapeutics, pivotal translational studies and clinical trials are underrepresented by minority populations. Despite attempts to bridge the disparities gap, there remains an unmet need to expand minority engagement and participation in clinical trials to better define the impact of therapy on efficacy outcomes, quality of life, and role of biomarkers in diverse patient populations. The IRONMAN registry (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03151629), a global, prospective, population-based study, was borne from this unmet medical need to address persistent gaps in our knowledge of advanced prostate cancer. Through integrated collection of clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, epidemiologic data, and biospecimens, IRONMAN has the goal of expanding our understanding of how and why prostate cancer outcomes differ by race and ethnicity. To this end, the Diversity Working Group of the IRONMAN registry has developed informed strategies for site selection, recruitment, engagement and retention, and trial design and eligibility criteria to ensure broad inclusion and needs awareness of minority participants. In concert with systematic strategies to tackle the complex levels of disparate care, our ultimate goal is to expand minority engagement in clinical research and bridge the disparities gap in prostate cancer care.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Remotely Delivered, Web-Based Behavioral Intervention for Men With Prostate Cancer: Four-Arm Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Diet and exercise may be associated with quality of life and survival in men with prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a remotely delivered web-based behavioral intervention among men with prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site 4-arm pilot randomized controlled trial of a 3-month intervention (TrueNTH Community of Wellness). Eligibility included self-reported prostate cancer diagnosis, having a personal device that connected to the internet, age ≥18 years, and ability to read English and receive text messages and emails. Men receiving chemotherapy or radiation, or those who reported contraindications to exercise, could participate with physician clearance. Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to additive intervention levels: website; website and personalized diet and exercise prescription; website, personalized prescription, Fitbit, and text messages; and website, personalized prescription, Fitbit, text messages, and 2 30-minute phone calls-one with an exercise trainer and one with a registered dietician. Primary outcomes were feasibility (accrual and attrition) and acceptability (survey data and website use). We described self-reported diet and exercise behavior at the time of enrollment, 3 months, and 6 months as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 202 men consented and were randomized between August 2017 and September 2018 (level 1: 49, level 2: 51, level 3: 50, level 4: 52). A total of 160 men completed the onboarding process and were exposed to their randomly assigned intervention (38, 38, 42, and 42 in levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). The follow-up rate was 82.7% (167/202) at 3 months and 77.2% (156/202) at 6 months. Participants had a median age of 70 years and were primarily White and college educated. Website visit frequency over the 3-month intervention period increased across levels (median: 2, 9, 11, and 16 visits for levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Most were satisfied or very satisfied with the intervention (20/39, 51%; 27/42, 64%; 23/44, 52%; and 27/42, 64% for levels 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). The percentage of men who reported being very satisfied was highest among level 4 participants (10/42, 24% vs 4/39, 10%; 5/42, 12%; and 5/44, 11% for levels 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Dissatisfaction was highest in level 1 (5/39, 13% vs 1/42, 2%; 3/44, 7%; and 2/42, 5% for levels 2, 3, and 4, respectively). We observed small improvements in diet and physical activity at 3 months among men in level 4 versus those in level 1. CONCLUSIONS: A web-based, remotely delivered, tailored behavioral intervention for men with prostate cancer is feasible. Future studies are warranted to increase the effect of the intervention on patient behavior while maintaining sustainability and scalability as well as to design and implement interventions for more diverse populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03406013; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406013.

Effect of Increasing Levels of Web-Based Behavioral Support on Changes in Physical Activity, Diet, and Symptoms in Men With Prostate Cancer: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: More than 3.1 million men in the United States are prostate cancer survivors. These men may improve their physical function, quality of life, and potentially their prognosis by adopting healthier lifestyle habits. The internet provides a scalable mechanism to deliver advice and support about improving physical activity and dietary habits, but the feasibility and acceptability of a Web-based lifestyle intervention and the dose of support necessary to improve health behaviors are not yet known. OBJECTIVES: The Community of Wellness is a Web-based intervention focused on supporting exercise and healthy dietary practices for men with prostate cancer. The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of the Community of Wellness Web portal among prostate cancer survivors by conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing 4 levels of additive Web-based content and interaction with participants: Level 1 (Teaching; Control), Level 2 (Teaching + Tailoring), Level 3 (Teaching + Tailoring + Technology), and Level 4 (Teaching + Tailoring + Technology + Touch). METHODS: This is a single-blinded RCT comparing 3 levels of behavioral support within the Community of Wellness Web portal intervention (Levels 2 to 4) with each other and with the control condition (Level 1). The control condition receives general static Web-based educational information only on physical activity and dietary habits, self-efficacy for behavior change, motivation for physical activity, and changes in anxiety and treatment-related side effects. We will enroll and randomize 200 men with prostate cancer equally to 4 levels of the Community of Wellness Web-based intervention for 3 months (50 men per level). Surveys will be completed by self-report at baseline, 3 months (immediately postintervention), and 6 months (3 months postintervention). Feasibility and acceptability will be assessed by enrollment statistics, Web-based usage metrics, and surveys at the 3-month time point. We will also conduct focus groups after the postintervention follow-up assessment in a sample of enrolled participants to evaluate elements of usability and acceptability that cannot be obtained via surveys. RESULTS: Enrollment is ongoing, with 124 enrolled. Study completion (6-month follow-up) is expected by July 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The goal of the study is to identify the level of support that is feasible, acceptable, promotes behavior change, and improves health in men with prostate cancer to inform future efforts to scale the program for broader reach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03406013; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406013 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73YpDIoTX). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/11257.

Preparing Patients and Partners for Recovery From the Side Effects of Prostate Cancer Surgery: A Group Approach.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the acceptance and knowledge attained in a preoperative psychoeducational group seminar for patients and partners. Education before radical prostatectomy (RP) helps patients set appropriate expectations for functional recovery. We hypothesized that the seminar would be acceptable and would facilitate learning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men scheduled for RP from March 1, 2012, to July 31, 2013, were eligible, and partners were invited. The 2.5-hour interactive seminar included multidisciplinary presentations about surgery-related urinary and sexual outcomes, rehabilitation, and couples' work toward recovering sexual intimacy. A satisfaction and knowledge survey was administered immediately afterward. We analyzed demographic and satisfaction data with descriptive statistics and evaluated congruence of patients' and partners' knowledge responses using nonparametric statistics. RESULTS: Of 618 patients scheduled, 426 patients and 342 partners attended; 323 couples provided complete data. Over 90% of participants found the seminar informative and 74% found a group setting comfortable; 84% found travel to the seminar burdensome. Most patients and partners (84% and 90%, respectively) expected some urinary incontinence and understood rehabilitation strategies to regain bladder control; 84% of patients and 78% of partners expected postsurgery sexual activity to be different and 73% of patients and 65% of partners expected surgery to make erections worse. Couples were incongruent regarding frequency of incontinence, likelihood of erectile dysfunction, and sex being different after surgery: patients were more realistic. CONCLUSION: A preoperative psychoeducational group seminar on the recovery from RP side effects promotes realistic expectations and is acceptable to patients and partners. Incongruent couples may need further instruction after surgery. Web-based methodology could improve access and should be studied in future research.

Impact of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 on prostate cancer aggressiveness: Lessons from a contemporary single institution radical prostatectomy series.

OBJECTIVE: To better evaluate tertiary Gleason pattern reporting and to evaluate the impact of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 (TP5) on prostate cancer pathological features and biochemical recurrence at our large single institution. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1962 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer; TP5 was reported in 159 cases (8.1%). Men with Gleason score (GS) 7 and GS 8 disease were divided into subgroups with and without TP5, and histopathological features were compared. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the impact on TP5 on biochemical-free survival (BFS). RESULTS: Tumors possessing GS 3 + 4 with TP5 were more likely to exhibit extraprostatic extension (EPE) and had a larger tumor diameter (TD) than GS 3 + 4 alone. GS 3 + 4 with TP5 was also associated with positive surgical margins (SM), seminal vesicle involvement (SVI), and higher pre-operative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, but without statistical significance. GS 4 + 3 with TP5 more commonly presented with EPE, positive SM, SVI, and greater TD and pre-operative PSA level than GS 4 + 3 alone. In multivariate analysis, Gleason score, EPE, and TP5 were overall independent risk factors for PSA recurrence in this cohort. Additionally, GS 4 + 3 with TP5 was associated with shorter time to recurrence versus GS 4 + 3 alone. CONCLUSION: Our results emphasize the importance of TP5 and suggest that criteria for tertiary pattern reporting in prostate cancer should be standardized. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of tertiary patterns in prognostic models.