Depression, Anxiety, and Their Association to Health-Related Quality of Life in Men Commencing Prostate Cancer Treatment at Tertiary Hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Comorbid depression and anxiety in men with localised prostate cancer (CaP) largely go undiagnosed and untreated and their effects on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in men with CaP should not be underestimated. We examined the prevalence of depression and anxiety and its association with HRQOL in men about to commence treatment for CaP and the differences between treatment groups, radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiation therapy (RT). METHOD: One hundred and seven participants from a longitudinal prospective observational study assessing depression, anxiety and HRQOL in men with localised CaP (DAHCaP), were used in this cross-sectional analysis. Data were collected shortly before participants were scheduled to receive their treatment. The Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC), the European Organisation for Research and Treatment in Cancer Quality of Life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and (EORTC QLQ-PR25) were used in this analysis. RESULTS: Symptoms of depression pre-treatment were noted in 39.3%, state anxiety 28%, trait anxiety 31.4% and prostate cancer anxiety in 12.1% of participants. Statistically significant correlations (P ≤ .05) with the CES-D and a cluster of symptoms on the EORTC QLQ-C30 domains for Global Health (rs = -.35), fatigue (rs = .38), pain (rs = .32), dyspnoea (rs = .28), insomnia (rs = .30) and finance (rs = .26) and EORTC QLQ-PR25 domains for urinary symptoms (rs = .43), bowel (rs = .43) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) (rs = .41) were observed.Statistically significant correlations were also noted between the STAI-S and EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-PR25. No statistically significant difference was noted between treatments. CONCLUSION: More men were depressed than anxious with significant associations with HRQOL prior to commencement of treatment. CaP treatments should focus not only on the prevailing indisposition but include a psychooncological and HRQOL assessment at pre-treatment in high-risk individuals.

Decisional Conflict is Associated with Treatment Modality and not Disease Knowledge in South African Men with Prostate Cancer: Baseline Results from a Longitudinal Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Decisional conflict (DC) is a psychological construct that an individual experiences in making a decision that involves risk, loss, regret, or challenges to one's values. This study assessed DC in a cohort of South African men undergoing curative treatment for localised prostate cancer (LPC). The objectives were to (1) to examine the association between DC and prostate cancer knowledge (PCK), demographics, state anxiety, prostate cancer anxiety and time to treatment and (2) to compare levels of DC between treatment groups [prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiation (RT)]. METHOD: Data, comprising the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), Prostate Cancer Knowledge (PCK), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S), the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) and demographic data from 83 participants of a larger prospective longitudinal observational study examining depression, anxiety and health related quality of life (DAHCaP) were analysed. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 63 years (RP 61yrs and RT 65yrs; p< 0.001). Most were of mixed ancestry (72.3%). The total DCS scores between the treatment groups (RP 25.00 and RT 18.75; p = 0.037) and two DCS sub-scores-uncertainty (p = 0.033), and support (p = 0.048), were significantly higher in the RP group. A statistically significant negative correlation was observed between state anxiety and time between diagnosis and treatment in the RP group (Spearman's rho = -0.368; p = 0.030). There was no correlation between the DCS score and PCK within each treatment group (Spearman's rho RP = -0.249 and RT = -0.001). CONCLUSION: Decisional conflict was higher in men undergoing RP. Men were more anxious in the RP group regarding the time treatment was received from diagnosis. No correlation was observed between DC and PCK. Pre-surgical management of DC should include shared decision making (SDM) which is cognisant of patients' values facilitated by a customised decision aid.

Overall and central obesity and prostate cancer risk in African men.

PURPOSE: African men are disproportionately affected by prostate cancer (PCa). Given the increasing prevalence of obesity in Africa, and its association with aggressive PCa in other populations, we examined the relationship of overall and central obesity with risks of total and aggressive PCa among African men. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2020, we recruited 2,200 PCa cases and 1,985 age-matched controls into a multi-center, hospital-based case-control study in Senegal, Ghana, Nigeria, and South Africa. Participants completed an epidemiologic questionnaire, and anthropometric factors were measured at clinic visit. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations of overall and central obesity with PCa risk, measured by body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), respectively. RESULTS: Among controls 16.4% were obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), 26% and 90% had WC > 97 cm and WHR > 0.9, respectively. Cases with aggressive PCa had lower BMI/obesity in comparison to both controls and cases with less aggressive PCa, suggesting weight loss related to cancer. Overall obesity (odds ratio: OR = 1.38, 95% CI 0.99-1.93), and central obesity (WC > 97 cm: OR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.10-2.33; and WHtR > 0.59: OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.24-2.29) were positively associated with D'Amico intermediate-risk PCa, but not with risks of total or high-risk PCa. Associations were more pronounced in West versus South Africa, but these differences were not statistically significant. DISCUSSION: The high prevalence of overall and central obesity in African men and their association with intermediate-risk PCa represent an emerging public health concern in Africa. Large cohort studies are needed to better clarify the role of obesity and PCa in various African populations.

COVID-19 Related Anxiety in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer at Tertiary Hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa

INTRODUCTION: The health profile of older adults places them at risk of infirmity and death from COVID-19 which may induce anxiety or exacerbate pre-existing anxiety. We examined COVID-19 related anxiety in men undergoing treatment for prostate cancer (CaP). METHOD: This study was conducted between July and September 2020. Sixty participants from a larger prospective, longitudinal study assessing depression, anxiety and health related quality of life in men with localized prostate cancer (DAHCaP) were included. COVID-19 related anxiety was measured at a single time point using, the Corona Virus Anxiety Scale (CAS). In addition, the following, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S), the Connor-Davidson Resilience (CD-RISC) scale and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) that form part of the DAHCaP study were used in the analysis. We extracted pre-pandemic data for the STAI-S. RESULTS: Twenty-one percent had diabetes, 62.3% had hypertension and 24.6% had cardiac diseases, all known risk factors for severe COVID-19. Only 3% scored ≥9 on the CAS, indicating COVID 19 anxiety dysfunction. Half knew of family or friends that had contracted COVID-19 especially those scoring higher on the CAS (P = 0.042). There was a significant decrease in STAI-S scores pre-pandemic to the pandemic phase (34.7 to 29.8, P = 0.003). No correlation was observed between CAS and STAI-S (rho = 0.08), CD-RISC (rho = -0.06) or MSPSS (rho = -0.15). There was a weak positive correlation between the CAS and monthly income (rho = 0.33; P = 0.010). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 did not induce significant anxiety in men being treated for CaP nor did it place an additional psychological burden, nor was there any correlation with state anxiety, resilience or social support.

A Custom Genotyping Array Reveals Population-Level Heterogeneity for the Genetic Risks of Prostate Cancer and Other Cancers in Africa.

Although prostate cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality for African men, the vast majority of known disease associations have been detected in European study cohorts. Furthermore, most genome-wide association studies have used genotyping arrays that are hindered by SNP ascertainment bias. To overcome these disparities in genomic medicine, the Men of African Descent and Carcinoma of the Prostate (MADCaP) Network has developed a genotyping array that is optimized for African populations. The MADCaP Array contains more than 1.5 million markers and an imputation backbone that successfully tags over 94% of common genetic variants in African populations. This array also has a high density of markers in genomic regions associated with cancer susceptibility, including 8q24. We assessed the effectiveness of the MADCaP Array by genotyping 399 prostate cancer cases and 403 controls from seven urban study sites in sub-Saharan Africa. Samples from Ghana and Nigeria clustered together, whereas samples from Senegal and South Africa yielded distinct ancestry clusters. Using the MADCaP array, we identified cancer-associated loci that have large allele frequency differences across African populations. Polygenic risk scores for prostate cancer were higher in Nigeria than in Senegal. In summary, individual and population-level differences in prostate cancer risk were revealed using a novel genotyping array. SIGNIFICANCE: This study presents an Africa-specific genotyping array, which enables investigators to identify novel disease associations and to fine-map genetic loci that are associated with prostate and other cancers.

Effective Project Management of a Pan-African Cancer Research Network: Men of African Descent and Carcinoma of the Prostate (MADCaP).

PURPOSE: Health research in low- and middle-income countries can generate novel scientific knowledge and improve clinical care, fostering population health improvements to prevent premature death. Project management is a critical part of the success of this research, applying knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to accomplish required goals. Here, we describe the development and implementation of tools to support a multifaceted study of prostate cancer in Africa, focusing on building strategic and operational capacity. METHODS: Applying a learning organizational framework, we developed and implemented a project management toolkit (PMT) that includes a management process flowchart, a cyclical center-specific schedule of activities, periodic reporting and communication, and center-specific monitoring and evaluation metrics. RESULTS: The PMT was successfully deployed during year one of the project with effective component implementation occurring through periodic cycles of dissemination and feedback to local center project managers. A specific evaluation was conducted 1 year after study initiation to obtain enrollment data, evaluate individual quality control management plans, and undertake risk log assessments and follow-up. Pilot data obtained identified areas in which centers required mentoring, strengthening, and capacity development. Strategies were implemented to improve project goals and operational capacity through local problem solving, conducting quality control checks and following compliancy with study aims. Moving forward, centers will perform quarterly evaluations and initiate strengthening measures as required. CONCLUSION: The PMT has fostered the development of both strategic and operational capacity across project centers. Investment in project management resources is essential to ensuring high-quality, impactful health research in low- and middle-income countries.

Treatments for breast abscesses in breastfeeding women.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of breastfeeding are well known, and the World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life and continuing breastfeeding to age two. However, many women stop breastfeeding due to lactational breast abscesses. A breast abscess is a localised accumulation of infected fluid in breast tissue. Abscesses are commonly treated with antibiotics, incision and drainage (I&D) or ultrasound-guided needle aspiration, but there is no consensus on the optimal treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different treatments for the management of breast abscesses in breastfeeding women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trial Register (27 February 2015). In addition we searched African Journals Online (27 February 2015), Google Scholar (27 February 2015), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Databases (27 February 2015) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal (27 February 2015). We also checked reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted experts in the field as well as relevant pharmaceutical companies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating any intervention for treating lactational breast abscesses compared with any other intervention. Studies published in abstract form, quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs were not eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included six studies. Overall, trials had an unclear risk of bias for most domains due to poor reporting. Two studies did not stratify data for lactational and non-lactational breast abscesses, and these studies do not contribute to the results. This review is based on data from four studies involving 325 women. Needle aspiration (with and without ultrasound guidance) versus incision and drainage (I&D) Mean time (days) to complete resolution of breast abscess (three studies) - there was substantial heterogeneity among these data (Tau(2) = 47.63, I(2) = 97%) and a clear difference between subgroups (with or without ultrasound guidance; Chi(2) = 56.88, I(2) = 98.2%, P = < 0.00001). We did not pool these data in a meta-analysis. Two studies excluded women who had treatment failure when they calculated the mean time to complete resolution. One study found that the time to complete resolution of breast abscess favoured needle aspiration over I&D (mean difference (MD) -6.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.81 to -4.33; n = 36), but excluded 9/22 (41%) women in the needle aspiration group due to treatment failure. Another study reported faster resolution in the needle aspiration group (MD -17.80; 95% CI -21.27 to -14.33; n = 64) but excluded 6/35 (17%) women in the needle aspiration group due to treatment failure. A third study also reported that needle aspiration was associated with a shorter time to complete resolution of breast abscess (MD -16.00; 95%CI -18.73 to -13.27; n = 60); however, the authors did not indicate the number of women who were lost to follow-up for either group, and it is unclear how many women contributed to this result. Considering the limitations of the available data, we do not consider the results to be informative. Continuation of breastfeeding, after treatment (success): results favoured the needle aspiration group, but we did not pool data from the two studies because of substantial unexplained heterogeneity (I(2) = 97%). One study reported that women in the needle aspiration group were more likely to continue breastfeeding (risk ratio (RR) 2.89; 95% CI 1.64 to 5.08; n = 60), whereas the other study found no clear difference (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.22 n = 70). Treatment failure was more common among women treated with needle aspiration compared to those who underwent I&D (RR 16.12; 95% CI 2.21 to 117.73; two studies, n = 115, low quality evidence). In one study, treatment with needle aspiration failed in 9/22 women who subsequently underwent I&D to treat their breast abscess. In another study, treatment with needle aspiration failed in 6/35 women, who subsequently underwent I&D. All abscesses in the I&D group were successfully treated.The included studies provided limited data for the review's secondary outcomes. No data were reported for adverse events. One study (60 women) reported that women in the needle aspiration group were more satisfied with their treatment than women who received I&D to treat their breast abscesses. Incision and drainage (I&D) with or without antibioticsOne study (150 women) compared the value of adding a broad-spectrum cephalosporin (single dose or a course of treatment) to women who underwent I&D for breast abscesses.The mean time to resolution of breast abscess was reported as being similar in all groups (although women with infection were excluded). Mean time to resolution for women who received a course of antibiotics was reported as 7.3 days, 6.9 days for women who received a single dose of antibiotics and 7.4 days for women who did not receive antibiotics. Standard deviations, P values and CIs were not reported and prevented further analysis. No data were reported for any continuation of breastfeeding after treatment (success). For treatment failure, there was no clear difference between the groups of women who received antibiotics (either a single dose or a course of antibiotics) and those who did not (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.76).Included studies rarely reported this review's secondary outcomes (including adverse events). For post-operative complications/morbidity, there was no difference in the risk of wound infections between the antibiotics and no antibiotics groups (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.29 to 1.17), irrespective of whether women received a single dose or a course of antibiotics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to determine whether needle aspiration is a more effective option to I&D for lactational breast abscesses, or whether an antibiotic should be routinely added to women undergoing I&D for lactational breast abscesses. We graded the evidence for the primary outcome of treatment failure as low quality, with downgrading based on including small studies with few events and unclear risk of bias.