Longitudinal regret after treatment for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer patients diagnosed with low- and intermediate-risk disease have several treatment options. Decisional regret after treatment is a concern, especially when poor oncologic outcomes or declines in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) occur. This study assessed determinants of longitudinal decisional regret in prostate cancer patients attending a multidisciplinary clinic and treated with radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), brachytherapy (BT), or active surveillance (AS). METHODS: Patients newly diagnosed with prostate cancer at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center who attended a multidisciplinary clinic were enrolled into a prospective study from 2006 to 2014. The Decision Regret Scale was administered at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months posttreatment. HRQoL was also assessed at regular intervals using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and 36-item RAND Medical Outcomes Study Short Form questionnaires. Adjusted probabilities of reporting regret were estimated via multivariable logistic regression fitted with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: A total of 652 patients met the inclusion criteria (395 RP, 141 EBRT, 41 BT, 75 AS). Decisional regret was consistently low after all of these treatments. In multivariable models, only African American race (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.47) was associated with greater regret across time. Age and control preference were marginally associated with regret. Regret scores were similar between RP patients who did and did not experience biochemical recurrence. Declines in HRQoL were weakly correlated with greater decisional regret. CONCLUSION: In the context of a multidisciplinary clinic, decisional regret did not differ significantly between treatment groups but was greater in African Americans and those reporting poorer HRQoL. Cancer 2017;123:4252-4258. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A prospective cohort study of treatment decision-making for prostate cancer following participation in a multidisciplinary clinic.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) are presented with several treatment options of similar efficacy but varying side effects. Understanding how and why patients make their treatment decisions, as well as the effect of treatment choice on long-term outcomes, is critical to ensuring effective, patient-centered care. This study examined treatment decision-making in a racially diverse, equal-access, contemporary cohort of patients with PCa counseled on treatment options at a multidisciplinary clinic. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was initiated at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (formerly Walter Reed Army Medical Center) in 2006. Newly diagnosed patients with PCa were enrolled before attending a multidisciplinary clinic. Patients completed surveys preclinic and postclinic to assess treatment preferences, reasons for treatment choice, and decisional regret. RESULTS: As of January 2014, 925 patients with PCa enrolled in this study. Surgery (54%), external radiation (20%), and active surveillance (12%) were the most common primary treatments for patients with low- and intermediate-risk PCa, whereas patients with high-risk PCa chose surgery (34%) or external radiation with neoadjuvant hormones (57%). Treatment choice differed by age at diagnosis, race, comorbidity status, and calendar year in both univariable and multivariable analyses. Patients preferred to play an active role in the decision-making process and cited doctors at the clinic as the most helpful source of treatment-related information. Almost all patients reported satisfaction with their decision. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first prospective cohort studies to examine treatment decision-making in an equal-access, multidisciplinary clinic setting. Studies of this cohort would aid in understanding and improving the PCa decision-making process.