Long-term quality of life after definitive treatment for prostate cancer: patient-reported outcomes in the second posttreatment decade.

Definitive treatment for prostate cancer includes radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), and brachytherapy (BT). The different side effect profiles of these options are crucial factors for patients and clinicians when deciding between treatments. This study reports long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients in their second decade after treatment for prostate cancer. We used a validated survey to assess urinary, bowel, and sexual function and HRQOL in a prospective cohort of patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer 14-18 years previously. We report and compare the outcomes of patients who were initially treated with RP, EBRT, or BT. Of 230 eligible patients, the response rate was 92% (n = 211) and median follow-up was 14.6 years. Compared to baseline, RP patients had significantly worse urinary incontinence and sexual function, EBRT patients had worse scores in all domains, and BT patients had worse urinary incontinence, urinary irritation/obstruction, and sexual function. When comparing treatment groups, RP patients underwent larger declines in urinary continence than did BT patients, and EBRT and BT patients experienced larger changes in urinary irritation/obstruction. Baseline functional status was significantly associated with long-term function for urinary obstruction and bowel function domains. This is one of the few prospective reports on quality of life for prostate cancer patients beyond 10 years, and adds information about the late consequences of treatment choices. These data may help patients make informed decisions regarding treatment choice based on symptoms they may experience in the decades ahead.

The Health Effects of Masculine Self-Esteem Following Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer Among Gay Men.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with masculine self-esteem in gay men following treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa) and to determine the association between masculine self-esteem, PCa-specific factors, and mental health factors in these patients. METHODS: A national cross-sectional survey of gay PCa survivors was conducted in 2010-2011. To be eligible for the study, men needed to be age 50 or older, reside in the United States, self-identify as gay, able to read, write, and speak English, and to have been treated for PCa at least 1 year ago. One hundred eleven men returned surveys. RESULTS: After simultaneously adjusting for the factors in our model, men aged 50-64 years and men aged 65-74 years reported lower masculine self-esteem scores than men aged 75 years or older. Lower scores were also reported by men who reported recent severe stigma. Men who reported feeling comfortable revealing their sexual orientation to their doctor reported higher masculine self-esteem scores than men who were not. The mental component score from the SF-12 was also positively correlated with masculine self-esteem. CONCLUSION: PCa providers are in a position to reduce feelings of stigma and promote resiliency by being aware that they might have gay patients, creating a supportive environment where gay patients can discuss specific sexual concerns, and engaging patients in treatment decisions. These efforts could help not only in reducing stigma but also in increasing masculine self-esteem, thus greatly influencing gay patients' recovery, quality of life, and compliance with follow-up care.

Impact of comorbidity on health-related quality of life after prostate cancer treatment: combined analysis of two prospective cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE: To improve and individualise estimates of treatment outcomes for men diagnosed with prostate cancer, we examined the impact of baseline comorbidity on health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes in an analysis of two pooled, prospective cohort studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 697 patients from three academic hospitals who received radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), or brachytherapy (BT). Measures of patient-reported bowel, urinary, and sexual symptoms along with physical and mental health were prospectively collected before treatment and 3, 12, 24, and 36 months after treatment. We assessed baseline comorbidity by the validated Index of Co-Existent Disease (ICED), abstracted from medical records. Regression mixed-models were built for each treatment group and HRQL outcome controlling for baseline age, education, marital status, risk group and patient-reported general health. RESULTS: About 71% of patients had one or more comorbid conditions at baseline. After adjusting for covariates, we found baseline comorbidity was independently associated with poorer sexual function after BT (P = 0.04) and RP (P = 0.03) but not EBRT (P = 0.35). Physical health was significantly worse for men receiving BT with more comorbidities (P = 0.02). Baseline comorbid conditions were not associated with urinary incontinence or bowel functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidity at baseline is significantly associated with poorer sexual function after prostate BT or RP. This information may help patients and their physicians anticipate outcomes after surgical and radiation treatments.

Using patient-reported outcomes to assess and improve prostate cancer brachytherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a successful quality improvement process that arose from unexpected differences in control groups' short-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within a comparative effectiveness study of a prostate brachytherapy technique intended to reduce urinary morbidity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients planning prostate brachytherapy at one of three institutions were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Patients were surveyed using a validated instrument to assess treatment-related toxicity before treatment and at pre-specified intervals. Unexpectedly, urinary PROs were worse in one of two standard brachytherapy technique control populations (US-BT1 and US-BT2 ). Therefore, we collaboratively reviewed treatment procedures, identified a discrepancy in technique, made a corrective modification, and evaluated the change. RESULTS: The patient groups were demographically and clinically similar. In the first preliminary analysis, US-BT2 patients reported significantly more short-term post-treatment urinary symptoms than US-BT1 patients. The study's treating physicians reviewed the US-BT1 and US-BT2 treatment protocols and found that they differed in whether they used an indwelling urinary catheter. After adopting the US-BT1 approach, short-term urinary morbidity in US-BT2 patients decreased significantly. Brachytherapy procedures were otherwise unchanged. CONCLUSION: Many procedures in cancer treatments are not evaluated, resulting in practice variation and suboptimal outcomes. Patients, the primary medical consumers, provide little direct input in evaluations of their care. We used PROs, a sensitive and valid measure of treatment-related toxicity, for quality assessment and quality improvement (QA/QI) of prostate brachytherapy. This serendipitous patient-centred QA/QI process may be a useful model for empirically evaluating complex cancer treatment procedures and for screening for substandard care.

Ensuring comprehensive assessment of urinary problems in prostate cancer through patient-physician concordance.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the concordance between clinicians and men diagnosed with prostate cancer on a clinician-derived pathophysiological classification of the following self-reported urinary complications: storage (irritative), voiding (obstructive), and leakage/incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen urology experts classified 37 urinary function questionnaire items into 3 primary conceptual dimensions (e.g., storage [irritative], voiding [obstructive] and urinary leakage/incontinence) that would best reflect each item's content. In addition, 218 patient participants provided responses to the 37 items. Using classifications by experts to develop the conceptual framework, the structure was tested using confirmatory factor analyses with patient data. RESULTS: Expert consensus was achieved in the classification of 31 out of 37 items. Using the 3-factor conceptual framework and patient data, the fit indices for the overall correlated factor model suggested an acceptable overall model fit. The analyses of the separate domains showed acceptable fit for the storage/irritative domain and the leaking/incontinence domain. The dimensionality of the voiding/obstructive domain was too difficult to estimate. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found items that conceptually and psychometrically support 2 constructs (leaking/incontinence and storage/irritative). The consistency of this support between the groups suggests a clinical relevance that is useful in treating patients. We have conceptual support for a third hypothesis (voiding/obstructive), although there were too few items to assess this psychometrically. Relative motivating factors of bother and urinary complaints were not addressed and remain an unmet need in this field.

Patient-reported outcomes after 3-dimensional conformal, intensity-modulated, or proton beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have suggested differing toxicity patterns for patients with prostate cancer who receive treatment with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), or proton beam therapy (PBT). METHODS: The authors reviewed patient-reported outcomes data collected prospectively using validated instruments that assessed bowel and urinary quality of life (QOL) for patients with localized prostate cancer who received 3DCRT (n = 123), IMRT (n = 153) or PBT (n = 95). Clinically meaningful differences in mean QOL scores were defined as those exceeding half the standard deviation of the baseline mean value. Changes from baseline were compared within groups at the first post-treatment follow-up (2-3 months from the start of treatment) and at 12 months and 24 months. RESULTS: At the first post-treatment follow-up, patients who received 3DCRT and IMRT, but not those who received PBT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in bowel QOL. At 12 months and 24 months, all 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful decrements in bowel QOL. Patients who received IMRT reported clinically meaningful decrements in the domains of urinary irritation/obstruction and incontinence at the first post-treatment follow-up. At 12 months, patients who received PBT, but not those who received IMRT or 3DCRT, reported a clinically meaningful decrement in the urinary irritation/obstruction domain. At 24 months, none of the 3 cohorts reported clinically meaningful changes in urinary QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received 3DCRT, IMRT, or PBT reported distinct patterns of treatment-related QOL. Although the timing of toxicity varied between the cohorts, patients reported similar modest QOL decrements in the bowel domain and minimal QOL decrements in the urinary domains at 24 months. Prospective randomized trials are needed to further examine these differences.

Long-term quality of life outcome after proton beam monotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: High-dose external radiation for localized prostate cancer results in favorable clinical outcomes and low toxicity rates. Here, we report long-term quality of life (QOL) outcome for men treated with conformal protons. METHODS: QOL questionnaires were sent at specified intervals to 95 men who received proton radiation. Of these, 87 men reported 3- and/or 12-month outcomes, whereas 73 also reported long-term outcomes (minimum 2 years). Symptom scores were calculated at baseline, 3 months, 12 months, and long-term follow-up. Generalized estimating equation models were constructed to assess longitudinal outcomes while accounting for correlation among repeated measures in an individual patient. Men were stratified into functional groups from their baseline questionnaires (normal, intermediate, or poor function) for each symptom domain. Long-term QOL changes were assessed overall and within functional groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Statistically significant changes in all four symptom scores were observed in the longitudinal analysis. For the 73 men reporting long-term outcomes, there were significant change scores for incontinence (ID), bowel (BD) and sexual dysfunction (SD), but not obstructive/irritative voiding dysfunction (OID). When stratified by baseline functional category, only men with normal function had increased scores for ID and BD. For SD, there were significant changes in men with both normal and intermediate function, but not poor function. CONCLUSIONS: Patient reported outcomes are sensitive indicators of treatment-related morbidity. These results quantitate the long-term consequences of proton monotherapy for prostate cancer. Analysis by baseline functional category provides an individualized prediction of long-term QOL scores. High dose proton radiation was associated with small increases in bowel dysfunction and incontinence, with more pronounced changes in sexual dysfunction.

Safety of early discharge for low-risk patients with febrile neutropenia: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Febrile neutropenia commonly complicates cancer chemotherapy. Outpatient treatment may reduce costs and improve patient comfort but risk progression of undetected medical problems. PATIENTS AND METHODS: By using our validated algorithm, we identified medically stable inpatients admitted for febrile neutropenia (neutrophils < 500/µL) after chemotherapy and randomly assigned them to continued inpatient antibiotic therapy or early discharge to receive identical antibiotic treatment at home. Our primary outcome was the occurrence of any serious medical complication, defined as evidence of medical instability requiring urgent medical attention. RESULTS: We enrolled 117 patients with 121 febrile neutropenia episodes before study termination for poor accrual. We excluded five episodes as ineligible and three because of inadequate documentation of the study outcome. Treatment groups were clinically similar, but sociodemographic imbalances occurred because of block randomization. The median presenting absolute neutrophil count was 100/µL. Hematopoietic growth factors were used in 38% of episodes. The median neutropenia duration was 4 days (range, 1 to 15 days). Five outpatients were readmitted to the hospital. Major medical complications occurred in five episodes (8%) in the hospital arm and four (9%) in the home arm (95% CI for the difference, -10% to 13%; P = .56). No study patient died. Patient-reported quality of life was similar on both arms. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence of adverse medical consequences from home care, despite a protocol designed to detect evidence of clinical deterioration. These results should reassure clinicians who elect to treat rigorously characterized low-risk patients with febrile neutropenia in suitable outpatient settings with appropriate surveillance for unexpected clinical deterioration.

Costs of home versus inpatient treatment for fever and neutropenia: analysis of a multicenter randomized trial.

PURPOSE: For patients with cancer who have febrile neutropenia, relative costs of home versus hospital treatment, including unreimbursed costs borne by patients and families, are poorly characterized. We estimated costs from a randomized trial of patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia for whom outpatient care was feasible, comparing inpatient treatment with discharge to home care after inpatient observation. METHODS: We collected direct medical and self-reported indirect costs for 57 inpatient and 35 outpatient treatment episodes of patients enrolled in a randomized trial from 1996 through 2000. Charges from hospital bills were converted to costs using Medicare cost-to-charge ratios. Patients kept daily logs of out-of-pocket payments and time spent by informal caregivers providing care. Dollar amounts were standardized to June 2008. RESULTS: Mean total charges for the hospital arm were 49% higher than for the home treatment arm ($16,341 v $10,977; P < .01). Mean estimated total costs for the hospital arm were 30% higher ($10,143 v $7,830; P < .01). Inspection of sparse available data suggests that payments made were similar by treatment arm. Inpatients and their caregivers spent more out of pocket than their outpatient counterparts (mean, $201 v $74; P < .01). Informal caregivers for both treatment arms reported similar time caring and lost from work. CONCLUSION: Home intravenous antibiotic treatment was less costly than continued inpatient care for carefully selected patients with cancer having febrile neutropenia without significantly increased indirect costs or caregiver burden.

Patient-reported long-term outcomes after conventional and high-dose combined proton and photon radiation for early prostate cancer.

CONTEXT: Increased radiation doses improve prostate cancer control but also increase toxicity to adjacent normal tissue. Proton radiation may attenuate adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: To determine long-term, patient-reported, dose-related toxicity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: We performed a post hoc cross-sectional survey of surviving participants in the Proton Radiation Oncology Group (PROG) 9509--a randomized trial comparing 70.2 Gy vs 79.2 Gy of combined photon and proton radiation for 393 men with clinically localized prostate cancer (stage T1b-T2b, prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, and no radiographic evidence of metastasis). The estimated 10-year biochemical progression rate for patients receiving standard dose was 32% (95% confidence interval, 26%-39%) compared with 17% (95% confidence interval, 11%-23%) for patients receiving high dose (P < .001). We surveyed 280 of the surviving 337 patients (83%) from April 2007 to September 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prostate Cancer Symptom Indices, a validated measure of urinary incontinence, urinary obstruction and irritation, bowel problems, and sexual dysfunction, and related quality-of-life instruments. RESULTS: At a median of 9.4 years after treatment (range, 7.4-12.1 years), participants' demographic and clinical characteristics were similar. Patient-reported outcomes were reported as mean (SD) scale score for standard dose vs high dose: urinary obstruction/irritation (23.3 [13.7] vs 24.6 [14.0]; P = .36), urinary incontinence (10.6 [17.7] vs 9.7 [15.8]; P = .99), bowel problems (7.7 [7.8] vs 7.9 [9.1]; P = .70), sexual dysfunction (68.2 [34.6] vs 65.9 [34.7]; P = .65), and most other outcomes were also similar, although patients receiving standard dose whose cancers had more often progressed expressed less confidence that their cancers were under control (mean [SD] scale score for standard dose, 76.0 [25.4] vs high dose, 86.2 [17.9]; P < .001). Many patients characterized their urinary and bowel function as normal despite reporting symptoms that, for other prostate cancer patients before and early after cancer treatment, caused substantial distress. CONCLUSION: Among men with clinically localized prostate cancer, treatment with higher-dose radiation compared with standard dose was not associated with an increase in patient-reported prostate cancer symptoms after a median of 9.4 years.

Rectal dose-volume histogram parameters are associated with long-term patient-reported gastrointestinal quality of life after conventional and high-dose radiation for prostate cancer: a subgroup analysis of a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: We examined whether rectal dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were associated with long-term patient-reported gastrointestinal (GI) quality of life (QOL) after conventional (70.2 GyE) or high-dose (79.2 GyE) radiation for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Of 64 men with localized prostate cancer alive with a minimum 7-year follow-up after treatment as part of a randomized trial with either 70.2 GyE or 79.2 GyE of external beam radiation at Massachusetts General Hospital, 56 men (88%) returned a QOL questionnaire, and 50 of those men had DVH information. The DVH parameters of the anterior rectal wall were correlated with patient-reported long-term GI QOL using Pearson correlation and t tests. RESULTS: There was a trend toward an association between increased long-term GI dysfunction and higher V60 (p = 0.07), V65 (p = 0.06), V70 (p = 0.09), and V75 (p = 0.09). When dichotomized by their medians, a V60 > 54% (p = 0.04), V70 > 44% (p = 0.06), and V75 > 39% (p = 0.06) were associated with increased long-term GI dysfunction. There was no difference in long-term GI dysfunction between men on the conventional vs. high-dose arms (p = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Dose-volume histogram parameters of the anterior rectal wall were associated with long-term patient-reported GI QOL after prostate radiation, whereas the dose prescribed to the prostate was not, suggesting that DVH constraints, rather than total prescribed dose, may have the greatest impact on long-term bowel dysfunction, and therefore that continued dose escalation may be feasible if appropriate dose-volume constraints are met.

Patient-reported acute gastrointestinal symptoms during concurrent chemoradiation treatment for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although it is known that standard 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer causes significant acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, research on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited. The authors undertook the current study to assess the feasibility of incorporating PRO measurement into routine clinical practice and to describe the trajectory of symptom development during treatment. METHODS: Seventy-seven consecutive patients who were treated between 2006 and 2008 were eligible. Patients completed the 7-item Bowel Problems Scale immediately before weekly physician visits. RESULTS: The questionnaire completion rate was 95%. Individual GI symptoms had different trajectories of development. By Week 5, approximately 40% of all patients developed clinically meaningful pain, bowel urgency, or tenesmus that was not present during Week 1; 30% developed diarrhea, abdominal cramping, and passing mucus. However, overall symptom burden was moderate. Seventy-five percent of patients who presented with rectal bleeding at Week 1 improved by Week 3 of treatment. Within each physician-assessed grade of diarrhea, patient experience varied widely. For example, of the 50 patients who developed grade 2 diarrhea on the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Acute Morbidity Scale, the numbers of patients reporting only occasional symptoms versus those reporting frequent or very frequent symptoms were similar. CONCLUSIONS: PROs provided information on patient symptoms during chemoradiation treatment for rectal cancer that was not captured otherwise, and it was feasible to incorporate PROs into routine clinical practice. The current results may be used by physicians to counsel their patients before treatment initiation and to provide a benchmark against which trials that use new therapies may be compared.

Race, healthcare access and physician trust among prostate cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of healthcare access and other characteristics on physician trust among black and white prostate cancer patients. METHODS: A three-timepoint follow-up telephone survey after cancer diagnosis was conducted. This study analyzed data on 474 patients and their 1,320 interviews over three time periods. RESULTS: Among other subpopulations, black patients who delayed seeking care had physician trust levels that were far lower than that of both Caucasians as well as that of the black patients overall. Black patients had greater variability in their levels of physician trust compared to their white counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Both race and access are important in explaining overall lower levels and greater variability in physician trust among black prostate cancer patients. Access barriers among black patients may spill over to the clinical encounter in the form of less physician trust, potentially contributing to racial disparities in treatment received and subsequent outcomes. Policy efforts to address the racial disparities in prostate cancer should prioritize improving healthcare access among minority groups.

Individualizing quality-of-life outcomes reporting: how localized prostate cancer treatments affect patients with different levels of baseline urinary, bowel, and sexual function.

PURPOSE: Although it is the most powerful predictor of early prostate cancer treatment-related complications and quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes, most studies do not stratify results by baseline function. Further, reporting functional outcomes as averaged numerical results may obscure informatively disparate courses. Using levels of treatment-related dysfunction, we address these problems and present the final QOL outcomes of our prospective cohort study of patients with early prostate cancer. METHODS: We created categories for sexual, bowel, and urinary function, measured using numerical scores of the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Indices and stratified into "normal," "intermediate" and "poor" levels of function by incorporating patient-reported symptom and distress information. We present QOL outcomes for 409 patients 36 months after radical prostatectomy, external-beam radiation therapy, and brachytherapy. RESULTS: Different levels of baseline sexual, bowel, and urinary function produced distinctive treatment-related changes from baseline to 36 months. In general, the average scale increases in dysfunction were greatest among patients with normal baseline function, although patients with normal and intermediate baseline function had similar increases in sexual dysfunction. For patients whose baseline urinary obstruction/irritation was poor, both average scale scores and most patients' level of function improved after treatment, particularly after surgery. CONCLUSION: The use of functional levels to stratify treatment-related outcomes by pretreatment functional status and to display the proportions of patients with improved, stable, or worsened function after treatment provides information that more specifically conveys the expected impact of treatment to patients choosing among localized prostate cancer treatments.