Mortality and biochemical recurrence after surgery, brachytherapy, or external radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a 10-year follow-up cohort study.

To compare the effectiveness at ten years of follow-up of radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy, in terms of overall survival, prostate cancer-specific mortality and biochemical recurrence. Cohort of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (T1/T2 and low/intermediate risk) from ten Spanish hospitals, followed for 10 years. The treatment selection was decided jointly by patients and physicians. Of 704 participants, 192 were treated with open radical retropubic prostatectomy, 317 with 125I brachytherapy alone, and 195 with 3D external beam radiation. We evaluated overall survival, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and biochemical recurrence. Kaplan-Meier estimators were plotted, and Cox proportional-hazards regression models were constructed to estimate hazard ratios (HR), adjusted by propensity scores. Of the 704 participants, 542 patients were alive ten years after treatment, and a total of 13 patients have been lost during follow-up. After adjusting by propensity score and Gleason score, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy were not associated with decreased 10-year overall survival (aHR = 1.36, p = 0.292 and aHR = 1.44, p = 0.222), but presented higher biochemical recurrence (aHR = 1.93, p = 0.004 and aHR = 2.56, p < 0.001) than radical prostatectomy at ten years of follow-up. Higher prostate cancer-specific mortality was also observed in external radiotherapy (aHR = 9.37, p = 0.015). Novel long-term results are provided on the effectiveness of brachytherapy to control localized prostate cancer ten years after treatment, compared to radical prostatectomy and external radiotherapy, presenting high overall survival, similarly to radical prostatectomy, but higher risk of biochemical progression. These findings provide valuable information to facilitate shared clinical decision-making.Study identifier at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01492751.

Five-year quality of life in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy alone versus external beam radiotherapy with high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost: a prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Brachytherapy (BT) and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) are effective treatments for high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). However, the impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQL) remains unclear. In this study, we compared EBRT alone with EBRT plus a boost with high-dose rate (HDR)-BT to determine the impact on HRQL in patients with high-risk PCa. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, multicenter study comparing patients with high-risk PCa treated with EBRT alone or EBRT + HDR-BT from 2004 to 2006. HRQL was assessed at baseline (pre-treatment) and periodically over the 5-year follow-up, using the SF-36 (v.2), EPIC, and FACT-G and FACT-P questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients were included in the study, of these, 41 received EBRT alone and 88 EBRT + HDR-BT. All patients received hormonotherapy. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar, except for a slightly higher mean number of comorbidities in the EBRT group. During follow-up, the only significant between-group difference was a greater worsening on EPIC hormonal domain in the EBRT alone group (p = 0.028). There were no significant differences in time and interaction of treatment in SF-36, and FACT-G and FACT-P questionnaires or EPIC urinary incontinence, urinary irritative-obstructive, and bowel and sexual domains over the 5-year follow-up. Oncological outcomes were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: After five years of follow-up, EBRT alone or combined with HDR-BT boost had a similar impact on HRQL in patients with high-risk localized PCa. However, patients in the EBRT alone group experienced greater worsening of hormonal domain according to EPIC questionnaire.

Comparative Effectiveness Research in Localized Prostate Cancer: A 10-Year Follow-up Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Long-term comparative effectiveness research on localized prostate cancer treatments is scarce, and evidence is lacking especially for brachytherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term impact of the side effects of radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, and external radiation therapy on patients with localized prostate cancer at 10 years, using propensity score analyses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was a prospective observational study of a cohort of men who received a diagnosis of clinically localized prostate cancer (clinical stage T1 or T2, low and intermediate risk group) and were treated with radical prostatectomy (n = 139), brachytherapy (n = 317), or external radiation therapy (n = 194). Treatment decisions were jointly made by patients and physicians. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) evaluation included the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and Short Form-36, administered centrally by telephone interviews before and annually after treatment. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite covers urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domains. To assess PRO changes over time, while accounting for correlation among repeated measures, generalized estimating equation models adjusted by propensity scores were constructed. RESULTS: The PRO completion rate at 10 years was 85.8%. Generalized estimating equation models showed that the pattern of radical prostatectomy side effects, with substantial urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunction, remained until 10 years after treatment (standard deviation [SD], -1.1 and -1.3, respectively). Brachytherapy produced late deterioration in urinary continence (SD, -0.4) and sexual function (SD, -0.9) that appeared midterm, but the differences from radical prostatectomy remained statistically significant at 10 years (P < .001 after adjusting by propensity score). External radiation therapy showed similar results to brachytherapy, but with bowel bother (SD, -0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Although late deterioration in radiation therapy groups attenuated differences from radical prostatectomy, relevant PRO differences still remained after 10 years. Our findings support that brachytherapy is the treatment option that causes the least impact on PROs; it is therefore an alternative to be considered when making evidence-based decisions on localized prostate cancer treatment.

Ultra-hypofractionated radiation therapy for unfavourable intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer is safe and effective: 5-year outcomes of a phase II trial.

OBJECTIVES: To report toxicity (primary endpoint) and biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) outcomes of a phase II trial evaluating ultra-hypofractionated radiation therapy (UHRT), focusing on patients with unfavourable intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2012 to 2017, 154 patients (92 with unfavourable intermediate-risk or high-risk PCa) were treated with helical TomoTherapy delivering 43.8-45.2 Gy in eight fractions over 3 weeks. Of these, 73% received hormonotherapy (51% neoadjuvant). RESULTS: The median (range) follow-up was 48 (19-84) months. For the whole series, crude BDFS and 5-year BDFS rates were 97.4% and 94.3%, respectively. The corresponding figures for unfavourable intermediate-risk and high-risk PCa were 96.7% and 90%, respectively. The crude metastasis-free survival rate was 98% for the unfavourable intermediate-risk and high-risk group. For the whole series, the 5-year cumulative urinary/intestinal grade 2+ late toxicity was 17.8/7.4%. No grade 4-5 toxicity was observed. One patient experienced late grade 3 toxicity (urinary). CONCLUSION: This eight-fraction UHRT regimen can be safely delivered to patients with unfavourable intermediate-risk/high-risk PCa. Its relapse rates are similar to those reported for the combination of external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy, however, the observed toxicity profile is milder. The disease survival rates compare favourably with historical controls in some other forms of radiotherapy, with similar side effects. Since the low rate of biochemical/metastasis relapse is encouraging, further research to confirm these results is justified.

Late Radiation and Cardiovascular Adverse Effects After Androgen Deprivation and High-Dose Radiation Therapy in Prostate Cancer: Results From the DART 01/05 Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: To present data on the late toxicity endpoints of a randomized trial (DART 01/05) conducted to determine whether long-term androgen deprivation (LTAD) was superior to short-term AD (STAD) when combined with high-dose radiation therapy (HDRT) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November 2005 and December 2010, 355 eligible men with cT1c-T3aN0M0 PCa and intermediate-risk and high-risk factors (2005 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria) were randomized to 4 months of AD combined with HDRT (median dose, 78 Gy) (STAD) or the same treatment followed by 24 months of AD (LTAD). Treatment-related complications were assessed using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 scoring schemes. Multivariate analyses for late toxicity were done using the Fine-Gray method. RESULTS: The 5-year incidence of grade ≥2 rectal and urinary toxicity was 11.1% and 8.2% for LTAD and 7.6% and 7.3% for STAD, respectively. Compared with STAD, LTAD was not significantly associated with a higher risk of late grade ≥2 rectal toxicity (hazard ratio [HR] 1.360, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.660-2.790, P=.410) or urinary toxicity (HR 1.028, 95% CI 0.495-2.130, P=.940). The multivariate analysis showed that a baseline history of intestinal comorbidity (HR 3.510, 95% CI 1.560-7.930, P=.025) and the rectal volume receiving >60 Gy (Vr60) (HR 1.030, 95% CI 1.001-1.060, P=.043) were the only factors significantly correlated with the risk of late grade ≥2 rectal complications. A history of previous surgical prostate manipulations was significantly associated with a higher risk of grade ≥2 urinary complications (HR 2.427, 95% CI 1.051-5.600, P=.038). Long-term AD (HR 2.090; 95% CI 1.170-3.720, P=.012) and a history of myocardial infarction (HR 2.080; 95% CI 1.130-3.810, P=.018) were significantly correlated with a higher probability of cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: Long-term AD did not significantly impact urinary or rectal radiation-induced toxicity, although it was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events. Longer follow-up is needed to measure the impact of AD on late morbidity and non-PCa mortality.

Corrigendum to "Uroncor consensus statement: Management of biochemical recurrence after radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer: From biochemical failure to castration resistance". [Rep. Pract. Oncol. Radiother. 20 (2015) 259-272].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2015.04.003.].

Recall and recognition hypermnesia for Socratic stimuli.

In two experiments, we investigate hypermnesia, net memory improvements with repeated testing of the same material after a single study trial. In the first experiment, we found hypermnesia across three trials for the recall of word solutions to Socratic stimuli (dictionary-like definitions of concepts) replicating Erdelyi, Buschke, and Finkelstein and, for the first time using these materials, for their recognition. In the second experiment, we had two "yes/no" recognition groups, a Socratic stimuli group presented with concrete and abstract verbal materials and a word-only control group. Using signal detection measures, we found hypermnesia for concrete Socratic stimuli-and stable performance for abstract stimuli across three recognition tests. The control group showed memory decrements across tests. We interpret these findings with the alternative retrieval pathways (ARP) hypothesis, contrasting it with alternative theories of hypermnesia, such as depth of processing, generation and retrieve-recognise. We conclude that recognition hypermnesia for concrete Socratic stimuli is a reliable phenomenon, which we found in two experiments involving both forced-choice and yes/no recognition procedures.

Uroncor consensus statement: Management of biochemical recurrence after radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer: From biochemical failure to castration resistance.

Management of patients who experience biochemical failure after radical radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy is highly challenging. The clinician must not only choose the type of treatment, but also the timing and optimal sequence of treatment administration. When biochemical failure occurs, numerous treatment scenarios are possible, thus making it more difficult to select the optimal approach. Moreover, rapid and ongoing advances in treatment options require that physicians make decisions that could impact both survival and quality of life. The aim of the present consensus statement, developed by the Urological Tumour Working Group (URONCOR) of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), is to provide cancer specialists with the latest, evidence-based information needed to make the best decisions for the patient under all possible treatment scenarios. The structure of this consensus statement follows the typical development of disease progression after biochemical failure, with the most appropriate treatment recommendations given for each stage. The consensus statement is organized into three separate chapters, as follows: biochemical failure with or without local recurrence and/or metastasis; progression after salvage therapy; and treatment of castration-resistant patients.

Regression of carotid intima-media thickness with nifedipine in hypertensive patients / Regresión del grosor de la interfase íntima-media carotídea con nifedipina en pacientes hipertensos (REINA)

Background: Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) have proved to reduce both blood pressure levels and cardiovascular outcomes, including the development of atherosclerosis. The INSIGHT study showed a less pronounced progression of carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) in patients treated with nifedipine (NIF) vs. those treated with diuretics, but because IMT was normal in both groups, it was difficult to assess the anti-atherosclerotic effect of NIF. We compared the effect of NIF or hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) on atherosclerosis regression in hypertensive patients with abnormally thick IMT. Patients and methods: 37 hypertensive patients were randomly assigned to be treated with slow release-NIF (30 mg) and 46 to HCTZ (25 mg), all of them with IMT > 0.6 mm. IMT, lipid profile, and serum uric acid, potassium, and glucose were analyzed at baseline and 12 months later. Results: Blood pressure was equally well controlled with both treatments. No biochemical abnormality was observed in neither groups. IMT was reduced 35% in the NIF group in comparison to 9.3% in HCTZ group. Discussion: BBCs restore endothelial function, exert antioxidant activity and limit smooth muscle cells growth and proliferation, thus inhibiting fundamental atherogenic phenomena. Our results show a clear regression of IMT, marker of subclinical atherosclerosis with NIF. Conclusion: Both treatments were equally effective reducing blood pressure. HCTZ did not cause metabolic disarrays, but only NIF induced IMT regression. Basal IMT is a main determinant of regression.

Antecedentes: Los bloqueadores de los canales de calcio (BCC) han demostrado reducir tanto los niveles de presión arterial como los eventos cardiovasculares, incluyendo el desarrollo de la aterosclerosis. El estudio INSIGHT mostró una progresión menos pronunciada del grosor de la capa íntima-media de la carotídea (GIMC) en pacientes tratados con nifedipina (NIF) vs. los tratados con diuréticos, pero debido a que el GIMC fue normal en ambos grupos, resultó difícil evaluar el efecto anti-aterosclerótico de la NIF. El presente estudio comparó el efecto de la NIF o hidroclorotiazida (HCTZ) en la regresión de aterosclerosis en pacientes hipertensos con GIMC anormalmente gruesa. Pacientes y métodos: 37 pacientes hipertensos fueron asignados al azar para ser tratados con NIF de liberación lenta (30 mg) y 46 a HCTZ (25 mg), todos ellos con GIMC > 0.6 mm. GIMC, perfil lipídico, y ácido úrico en suero, potasio y glucosa se analizaron al principio y 12 meses más tarde. Discusión: Los BCC restauran la función endotelial, ejercen actividad antioxidante y limitan el crecimiento y la proliferación de las células del músculo liso, inhibiendo así fenómenos aterogénicos fundamentales. Nuestros resultados muestran una clara regresión del GIMC, marcador de aterosclerosis subclínica, con NIF. Conclusión: Ambos tratamientos fueron igualmente efectivos para reducir la presión arterial. HCTZ no causó desorden metabólico, pero sólo la NIF induce la regresión del GIMC. El GIMC basal es un determinante principal de la regresión.

High-dose radiotherapy with short-term or long-term androgen deprivation in localised prostate cancer (DART01/05 GICOR): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimum duration of androgen deprivation combined with high-dose radiotherapy in prostate cancer remains undefined. We aimed to determine whether long-term androgen deprivation was superior to short-term androgen deprivation when combined with high-dose radiotherapy. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial, patients were recruited from ten university hospitals throughout Spain. Eligible patients had clinical stage T1c-T3b N0M0 prostate adenocarcinoma with intermediate-risk and high-risk factors according to 2005 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive either 4 months of androgen deprivation combined with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy at a minimum dose of 76 Gy (range 76-82 Gy; short-term androgen deprivation group) or the same treatment followed by 24 months of adjuvant androgen deprivation (long-term androgen deprivation group), stratified by prostate cancer risk group (intermediate risk vs high risk) and participating centre. Patients assigned to the short-term androgen deprivation group received 4 months of neoadjuvant and concomitant androgen deprivation with subcutaneous goserelin (2 months before and 2 months combined with high-dose radiotherapy). Anti-androgen therapy (flutamide 750 mg per day or bicalutamide 50 mg per day) was added during the first 2 months of treatment. Patients assigned to long-term suppression continued with the same luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue every 3 months for another 24 months. The primary endpoint was biochemical disease-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02175212. FINDINGS: Between Nov 7, 2005, and Dec 20, 2010, 178 patients were randomly assigned to receive short-term androgen deprivation and 177 to receive long-term androgen deprivation. After a median follow-up of 63 months (IQR 50-82), 5-year biochemical disease-free survival was significantly better among patients receiving long-term androgen deprivation than among those receiving short-term treatment (90% [95% CI 87-92] vs 81% [78-85]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·88 [95% CI 1·12-3·15]; p=0·01). 5-year overall survival (95% [95% CI 93-97] vs 86% [83-89]; HR 2·48 [95% CI 1·31-4·68]; p=0·009) and 5-year metastasis-free survival (94% [95% CI 92-96] vs 83% [80-86]; HR 2·31 [95% CI 1·23-3·85]; p=0·01) were also significantly better in the long-term androgen deprivation group than in the short-term androgen deprivation group. The effect of long-term androgen deprivation on biochemical disease-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival was more evident in patients with high-risk disease than in those with low-risk disease. Grade 3 late rectal toxicity was noted in three (2%) of 177 patients in the long-term androgen deprivation group and two (1%) of 178 in the short-term androgen deprivation group; grade 3-4 late urinary toxicity was noted in five (3%) patients in each group. No deaths related to treatment were reported. INTERPRETATION: Compared with short-term androgen deprivation, 2 years of adjuvant androgen deprivation combined with high-dose radiotherapy improved biochemical control and overall survival in patients with prostate cancer, particularly those with high-risk disease, with no increase in late radiation toxicity. Longer follow-up is needed to determine whether men with intermediate-risk disease benefit from more than 4 months of androgen deprivation. FUNDING: Spanish National Health Investigation Fund, AstraZeneca.

Estimating preferences for treatments in patients with localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Studies of patients' preferences for localized prostate cancer treatments have assessed radical prostatectomy and external radiation therapy, but none of them has evaluated brachytherapy. The aim of our study was to assess the preferences and willingness to pay of patients with localized prostate cancer who had been treated with radical prostatectomy, external radiation therapy, or brachytherapy, and their related urinary, sexual, and bowel side effects. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was an observational, prospective cohort study with follow-up until 5 years after treatment. A total of 704 patients with low or intermediate risk localized prostate cancer were consecutively recruited from 2003 to 2005. The estimation of preferences was conducted using time trade-off, standard gamble, and willingness-to-pay methods. Side effects were measured with the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC), a prostate cancer-specific questionnaire. Tobit models were constructed to assess the impact of treatment and side effects on patients' preferences. Propensity score was applied to adjust for treatment selection bias. RESULTS: Of the 580 patients reporting preferences, 165 were treated with radical prostatectomy, 152 with external radiation therapy, and 263 with brachytherapy. Both time trade-off and standard gamble results indicated that the preferences of patients treated with brachytherapy were 0.06 utilities higher than those treated with radical prostatectomy (P=.01). Similarly, willingness-to-pay responses showed a difference of €57/month (P=.004) between these 2 treatments. Severe urinary incontinence presented an independent impact on the preferences elicited (P<.05), whereas no significant differences were found by bowel and sexual side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that urinary incontinence is the side effect with the highest impact on preferences and that brachytherapy and external radiation therapy are more valued than radical prostatectomy. These time trade-off and standard gamble preference assessments as well as the willingness-to-pay estimation could be useful to perform respectively cost-utility or cost-benefit analyses, which can guide health policy decisions.

A Phase II Study of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Low-Intermediate-High-Risk Prostate Cancer Using Helical Tomotherapy: Dose-Volumetric Parameters Predicting Early Toxicity.

UNLABELLED: Endpoint: To assess early urinary (GU) and rectal (GI) toxicities after helical tomotherapy Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and to determine their predictive factors. METHODS: Since May 2012, 45 prostate cancer patients were treated with eight fractions of 5.48 (low risk, 29%) or 5.65 Gy (intermediate-high risk, 71%) on alternative days over 2.5 weeks. The exclusion criteria were Gleason score 9-10, PSA >40 ng/mL, cT3b-4, IPSS ≥20, and history of acute urinary retention. During the follow-up, a set of potential prognostic factors was correlated with urinary or rectal toxicity. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 13.8 months (2-25 months). There were no grade ≥3 toxicities. Acute grade 2 GU complications were found in a 22.7% of men, but in 2.3% of patients at 1 month, 0% at 6 months, and 0% at 12 months. The correspondent figures for grade 2 GI toxicities were 20.4% (acute), 2.3% (1 month), 3.6% (6 months), and 5% (12 months). Acute GI toxicity was significantly correlated with the rectal volume (>15 cm(3)) receiving 28 Gy, only when expressed as absolute volume. The age (>72 years old) was a predictor of GI toxicity after 1 month of treatment. No correlation was found, however, between urinary toxicity and the other analyzed variables. IPSS increased significantly at the time of the last fraction and within the first month, returning to the baseline at sixth month. Urinary-related quality of life (IPSS question 8 score), it was not significantly worsen during radiotherapy returning to the baseline levels 1 month after the treatment. At 12 months follow-up patient's perception of their urinary function improved significantly in comparison with the baseline. CONCLUSION: Our scheme of eight fractions on alternative days delivered using helical tomotherapy is well tolerated. We recommend using actual volume instead of percentual volume in the treatment planning, and not to exceed 15 cm(3) of rectal volume receiving ≥25 Gy in order to diminish acute GI toxicity.

A clinical review on extreme hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer using nonrobotic linear accelerators.

Seven phase I-II studies fell within the inclusion criteria. Details on the radiotherapy technique, patient selection, fractionation scheme, exclusion criteria, treatment toxicity, quality-of-life, and tumor control were collected. The studies provide encouraging results of acute and late toxicity, with rare grade 3 events, that seem comparable to robotic SBRT. The biochemical disease-free survival rates look promising, but most patients belong to the low-risk group. The trials are limited by a short follow-up, small number of patients, and different approaches in prescribing dose and defining the acceptable dose heterogeneities. Currently, nonrobotic SBRT regimens should be used in the context of clinical trials.

Quality of life impact of treatments for localized prostate cancer: cohort study with a 5 year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To assess long-term quality of life (QoL) impact of treatments in localized prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy or brachytherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, prospective cohort study with pre-treatment QoL evaluation and follow-up until five years after treatment. 704 patients with low or intermediate risk localized prostate cancer were consecutively recruited in 2003-2005. QoL was measured by the EPIC questionnaire, with urinary irritative-obstructive, incontinence, bowel, sexual, and hormonal scores (ranging 0-100). RESULTS: Brachytherapy's QoL impact was restricted to the urinary domain, Generalized Estimating Equation models showed score changes at five years of -12.0 (95% CI=-15.0, -9.0) in incontinence and -5.3 (95% CI=-7.5, -3.1) in irritative-obstructive scales. Compared to brachytherapy, radical prostatectomy fared +3.3 (95% CI=+0.0, +6.5) points better in irritative-obstructive but -17.1 (95% CI=-22.7, -11.5) worse in incontinence. Sexual deterioration was observed in radical prostatectomy (-19.1; 95% CI=-25.1, -13.1) and external radiotherapy groups (-7.5; 95% CI=-12.5, -2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Brachytherapy is the treatment causing the least impact on QoL except for moderate urinary irritative-obstructive symptoms. Our study provides novel long-term valuable information for clinical decision making, supporting brachytherapy as a possible alternative to radical prostatectomy for patients seeking an attempted curative treatment, while limiting the risk for urinary incontinence and sexual impact on QoL.

Information for decision making by patients with early-stage prostate cancer: a comparison across 9 countries.

PURPOSE: To describe decisional roles of patients with early-stage prostate cancer in 9 countries and to compare the information they rated important for decision making (DM). METHOD: A survey of recently treated patients was conducted in Canada, Italy, England, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Participants indicated their decisional role in their actual decision and the role they would prefer now. Each participant also rated (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid) the importance of obtaining answers, between diagnosis and treatment decision, to each of 92 questions. For each essential/desired question, participants specified all purposes for that information (to help them: understand/decide/plan/not sure/other). RESULTS: A total of 659 patients participated with country-specific response rates between 58%-77%. Between 83%-96% of each country's participants recalled actually taking an active decisional role and, in most countries, that increased slightly if they were to make the decision today; there were no significant differences among countries. There was a small reliable difference in the mean number of questions rated essential for DM across countries. More striking, however, was the wide variability within each country: no question was rated essential for DM by even 50% of its participants but almost every question was rated essential by some. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all participants from each country want to participate in their treatment decisions. Although there are country-specific differences in the amount of information required, wide variation within each country suggests that information that patients feel is essential or desired for DM should be addressed on an individual basis in all countries.

Quality-of-life impact of primary treatments for localized prostate cancer in patients without hormonal treatment.

PURPOSE: Earlier studies evaluating the effect on quality of life (QoL) of localized prostate cancer interventions included patients receiving adjuvant hormone therapy, which could have affected their outcomes. Our objective was to compare the QoL impact of the three most common primary treatments on patients who were not receiving adjuvant hormonal treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study of 435 patients treated with radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiotherapy, or brachytherapy. QoL was assessed before and after treatment with the Short Form-36 and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite. Differences between groups were tested by analysis of variance. Distribution of outcome at 3 years was examined by stratifying according to baseline status. Generalized estimating equation models were constructed to assess the effect of treatment over time. RESULTS: Compared with the brachytherapy group, the prostatectomy group showed greater deterioration on urinary incontinence and sexual scores but better urinary irritative-obstructive results (-18.22, -13.19, and +6.38, respectively, at 3 years; P < .001). In patients with urinary irritative-obstructive symptoms at baseline, improvement was observed in 64% of those treated with nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Higher bowel worsening (-2.87, P = .04) was observed in the external radiotherapy group, with 20% of patients reporting bowel symptoms. CONCLUSION: Radical prostatectomy caused urinary incontinence and sexual dysfunction but improved pre-existing urinary irritative-obstructive symptoms. External radiotherapy and brachytherapy caused urinary irritative-obstructive adverse effects and some sexual dysfunction. External radiotherapy also caused bowel adverse effects. Relevant differences between treatment groups persisted for up to 3 years of follow-up, although the difference in sexual adverse effects between brachytherapy and prostatectomy tended to decline over long-term follow-up. These results provide valuable information for clinical decision making.

Information needs of early-stage prostate cancer patients: a comparison of nine countries.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Providing information to patients can improve their medical and psychological outcomes. We sought to identify core information needs common to most early-stage prostate cancer patients in participating countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Convenience samples of patients treated 3-24 months earlier were surveyed in Canada, England, Italy, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Each participant rated the importance of addressing each of 92 questions in the diagnosis-to-treatment decision interval (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid). Multivariate modelling determined the extent of variance accounted by covariates, and produced an unbiased prediction of the proportion of essential responses for each question. RESULTS: Six hundred and fifty-nine patients responded (response rates 45-77%). On average, 35-53 questions were essential within each country; similar questions were essential to most patients in most countries. Beyond cross-country similarities, each country showed wide variability in the number and which questions were essential. Multivariate modelling showed an adjusted R-squared with predictors country, age, education, and treatment group of only 6% of the variance. A core of 20 questions were predicted to be essential to >2/3 of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Core information can be identified across countries. However, providing the core should only be a first step; each country should then provide information tailored to the needs of the individual patient.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer. Review of clinical trials.

Over the last 10 years the radiobiology of prostate cancer has been studied both in experimental research and in clinical trials of hypofractionated radiotherapy. Unlike most cancers, the alpha/beta ratio of the prostatic carcinoma is probably lower than that of the healthy organs around the gland, although there is no agreement as to how low this alpha/beta really is. This peculiarity implies that, theoretically, a hypofractionated schedule would increase the therapeutic gain of radiotherapy. Until now, following four published randomised trials, hypofractionated radiotherapy has shown results in terms of acute and chronic toxicity and tumour control similar to those obtained with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. However, these studies are not conclusive. The two studies that involved significant followup used 2D technique and delivered low total equivalent dose. On the other hand, the two most recent trials, which administered total equivalent doses = or >78 Gy with modern techniques (IMRT, IGRT), involved the disadvantage of small samples and a short follow-up period. The results of ongoing randomised trials are necessary to confirm the advantages of hypofractionation over normofractionated radiotherapy. The impact of hypofractionated radiotherapy on the patient's health-related quality of life, and on transports and health care costs, should also be investigated.

[Evaluation of the quality of life of patients with localizad prostate cancer: validation of the Spanish version of the EPIC]. / Evaluación de la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata localizado: validación de la versión española del cuestionario EPIC.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) is a specific questionnaire for patients with prostate cancer designed to evaluate the impact of treatments on their quality of life. It contains 50 items divided in 4 summaries: urinary, intestinal, sexual and hormonal. The objective was to adapt the EPIC to Spanish and to evaluate its metric characteristics. METHOD: The method followed for the adaptation included translation and back-translation. The metric characteristics were evaluated in 50 patients from each treatment -prostatectomy, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy-, all of whom were administered the EPIC, SF-36 and FACT (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy) pre and post intervention. Reliability was evaluated with the Cronbach alpha coefficient. Construct validity was assessed by means of correlations between subscales of the EPIC and questionnaires, and comparing the patients with and without hormonal therapy (T-test). In order to value sensitivity to change, the standardized effect size was calculated after the intervention. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha of the EPIC summaries was high (0.66-0.89). The correlations between the EPIC and the FACT were near or higher than 0.4. Differences were found in the hormonal and sexual summaries between the patients with and without hormonal therapy (p<0.01). The standardized effect size was large (>0.8) in the urinary (3 groups) and sexual (group of prostatectomy) summary, and moderate in the intestinal summary (0.6 and 0.7) for the 2 groups of radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of the EPIC is reliable, valid and presents an excellent sensitivity to change, being a useful tool to compare the impact in the quality of life of the 3 treatments.

Evaluación de la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata localizado: validación de la versión española del cuestionario EPIC / Evaluation of the quality of life of patients with localizad prostate cancer: validation of the Spanish version of the EPIC

Fundamento y objetivo: el EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) es un cuestionario específico para la evaluación del impacto de los tratamientos en la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de próstata. Contiene 50 ítems divididos en 4 sumarios: urinario, intestinal, sexual y hormonal. El objetivo de este trabajo ha sido adaptar el cuestionario EPIC al español y evaluar sus características métricas. Método: para la adaptación se siguió el método de traducción directa-inversa. Las características métricas se evaluaron en 50 pacientes de cada tratamiento ¿prostatectomía, braquiterapia y radioterapia externa¿, a quienes se administraron el EPIC, SF-36 y FACT (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy) antes y después de la intervención. Con el coeficiente alfa de Cronbach se evaluó la fiabilidad. La validez de constructo se estudió mediante correlaciones entre subescalas del EPIC y entre cuestionarios, y comparando a los pacientes con y sin hormonoterapia (prueba de la t de Student). Para valorar la sensibilidad al cambio se calculó el tamaño del efecto estandarizado tras la intervención. Resultados: el alfa de Chronbach de los sumarios del EPIC fue elevado (0,66¿0,89). Las correlaciones entre el EPIC y el FACT fueron cercanas o superiores a 0,4. Se encontraron diferencias en los sumarios hormonal y sexual entre los pacientes con y sin hormonoterapia (p<0,01). El tamaño del efecto estandarizado fue grande (>0,8) en los sumarios urinario (3 grupos) y sexual (grupo de prostatectomía), y moderado en el sumario intestinal (0,6 y 0,7) para los 2 grupos de radioterapia. Conclusiones: la versión en castellano del EPIC es fiable y válida, y presenta una sensibilidad al cambio excelente, por lo que resulta una herramienta útil para comparar el impacto en la calidad de vida de los 3 tratamientos (AU)

Background and objective: The EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) is a specific questionnaire for patients with prostate cancer designed to evaluate the impact of treatments on their quality of life. It contains 50 items divided in 4 summaries: urinary, intestinal, sexual and hormonal. The objective was to adapt the EPIC to Spanish and to evaluate its metric characteristics. Method: The method followed for the adaptation included translation and back-translation. The metric characteristics were evaluated in 50 patients from each treatment ¿prostatectomy, brachytherapy and external radiotherapy¿, all of whom were administered the EPIC, SF-36 and FACT (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy) pre and post intervention. Reliability was evaluated with the Cronbach alpha coefficient. Construct validity was assessed by means of correlations between subscales of the EPIC and questionnaires, and comparing the patients with and without hormonal therapy (T-test). In order to value sensitivity to change, the standardized effect size was calculated after the intervention. Results: The Cronbach's alpha of the EPIC summaries was high (0.66¿0.89). The correlations between the EPIC and the FACT were near or higher than 0.4. Differences were found in the hormonal and sexual summaries between the patients with and without hormonal therapy (p<0.01). The standardized effect size was large (>0.8) in the urinary (3 groups) and sexual (group of prostatectomy) summary, and moderate in the intestinal summary (0.6 and 0.7) for the 2 groups of radiotherapy. Conclusions: The Spanish version of the EPIC is reliable, valid and presents an excellent sensitivity to change, being a useful tool to compare the impact in the quality of life of the 3 treatments (AU)