Prospective quality of life in men choosing open vs. robotic radical prostatectomy: long-term results from a racially diverse multi-institutional database.

PURPOSE: To compare 5-year health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between prostate cancer (CaP) patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) and assess for racial disparities between Caucasian American (CA) and African American (AA) men undergoing surgery. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of HRQoL data was conducted on patients diagnosed with CaP from 2007 to 2017 and enrolled in the Center for Prostate Disease Research (CPDR) Multicenter National Database. Using the EPIC and SF-36 instruments, changes in urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal domains, as well as physical and mental component summary scores were compared across surgery type (RALP versus RRP) at pre-treatment ("baseline"), and annually for 5 years. We further compared HRQoL outcomes in CA and AA men undergoing surgery. Longitudinal HRQoL patterns were modeled using generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusting for baseline HRQoL and other characteristics. RESULTS: 448 CaP patients (22% AA) met study inclusion criteria, 66% underwent RALP and 34% underwent RRP. At baseline, HRQoL domains were comparable across treatment group (RALP vs. RRP). In the adjusted low-risk cohort, there were only three time points that met a statistically significant HRQoL difference in EPIC scores between RALP and RRP. Urinary function score during year 4 of follow-up showed a 7.5 (95% CI 3.1-11.9, P = 0.01) points difference in favor of RRP. Bowel bother scores favored RRP in year 1 with a difference of 3.1 (95% CI 0.7-5.4, P = 0.04) points, and in year 5 with a difference of 3.8 (95% CI 1.1-6.4, P = 0.03) points. In the intermediate/high-risk cohort, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the domain scores between RALP and RRP during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic and open approach to radical prostatectomy led to comparable HRQoL outcomes at a follow-up length of 60 months. No HRQoL racial disparities were found between AA and CA men during long-term follow-up.

Impact of Subsequent Biopsies on Comprehensive Health Related Quality of Life in Patients with and without Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify the effects of subsequent prostate needle biopsies after the baseline biopsy on health related quality of life with time. We compared men with and without prostate cancer, and men who did and did not undergo followup prostate needle biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included in analysis were patients enrolled in the Center for Prostate Disease Research Multicenter National Database between 2007 and 2015 who had low or favorable intermediate risk prostate cancer, were on active surveillance and underwent prostate needle biopsy for suspicion of prostate cancer. Patients completed the EPIC (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) and the RAND SF-36 (36-Item Short Form Health Survey) after baseline biopsy and at regular followup intervals. Mean health related quality of life was compared with time between patients who did and did not undergo subsequent prostate needle biopsies following baseline. RESULTS: Of the 637 patients included in study 129 (20.3%) with prostate cancer were on active surveillance and 508 (79.7%) were in the noncancer group. In the cancer and noncancer groups mean ± SD followup was 34.7 ± 16.9 and 31.6 ± 14.6 months, respectively. Of the patients with prostate cancer 54 (60.7%) underwent subsequent prostate needle biopsies compared with 114 (27.1%) without cancer. No significant impact on health related quality of life was observed in men who underwent subsequent prostate needle biopsies during a 5-year period. CONCLUSIONS: A subsequent prostate needle biopsy is required in most active surveillance protocols and in men with persistent suspicion of prostate cancer. Our analysis shows that subsequent prostate needle biopsies do not significantly impact health related quality of life.

A prospective study of health-related quality of life outcomes among men treated for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: the impact of primary and secondary therapies.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the impact of primary and secondary therapies for high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was initiated in 2007 at Center for Prostate Disease Research Multicenter National Database sites. Longitudinal patterns in HRQoL from baseline (pre-treatment) to 5 years post-diagnosis were examined for patients with high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, treated by radical prostatectomy (RP) or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Change in HRQoL was modeled using linear regression models fit with generalized estimating equations. The probability of maintaining HRQoL was compared between patients receiving RP only versus RP with secondary treatment. RESULTS: Of 445 men with high- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, 228 underwent RP and 143 had EBRT± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Fifty received secondary therapy (EBRT and/or ADT or chemotherapy) after RP. RP patients showed a greater decline over time in sexual function and bother and urinary function compared to EBRT±ADT patients. Patients who had secondary therapy after RP were less likely to maintain their HRQoL compared to those who had RP alone. These differences were most pronounced for sexual and hormonal function. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer patients experience significant declines in HRQoL after primary therapy. Additional secondary therapy after RP, in the form of EBRT and/or ADT, appears to be responsible for further deterioration in HRQoL outcomes.

Prospective Quality of Life in Men Choosing Active Surveillance Compared to Those Biopsied but not Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Active surveillance is an important alternative to definitive therapy for men with low risk prostate cancer. However, the impact of active surveillance on health related quality of life compared to that in men without cancer remains unknown. In this study we evaluated health related quality of life outcomes in men on active surveillance compared to men followed after negative prostate needle biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on men who were enrolled into the Center for Prostate Disease Research Multicenter National Database and underwent prostate needle biopsy for suspicion of prostate cancer between 2007 and 2014. Health related quality of life was assessed at biopsy (baseline) and annually for up to 3 years using SF-36 and EPIC questionnaires. Health related quality of life scores were modeled using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for baseline health related quality of life, and demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1,204 men who met the initial eligibility criteria 420 had a negative prostate needle biopsy (noncancer comparison group). Among the 411 men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer 89 were on active surveillance. Longitudinal analysis revealed that for most health related quality of life subscales there were no significant differences between the groups in adjusted health related quality of life score trends over time. CONCLUSIONS: In this study most health related quality of life outcomes in patients with low risk prostate cancer on active surveillance did not differ significantly from those of men without prostate cancer. A comparison group of men with a similar risk of prostate cancer detection is critical to clarify the psychological and physical impact of active surveillance.

Prospective quality-of-life outcomes for low-risk prostate cancer: Active surveillance versus radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: For patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa), active surveillance (AS) may produce oncologic outcomes comparable to those achieved with radical prostatectomy (RP). Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes are important to consider, yet few studies have examined HRQoL among patients with PCa who were managed with AS. In this study, the authors compared longitudinal HRQoL in a prospective, racially diverse, and contemporary cohort of patients who underwent RP or AS for low-risk PCa. METHODS: Beginning in 2007, HRQoL data from validated questionnaires (the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and the 36-item RAND Medical Outcomes Study short-form survey) were collected by the Center for Prostate Disease Research in a multicenter national database. Patients aged ≤75 years who were diagnosed with low-risk PCa and elected RP or AS for initial disease management were followed for 3 years. Mean scores were estimated using generalized estimating equations adjusting for baseline HRQoL, demographic characteristics, and clinical patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the patients with low-risk PCa, 228 underwent RP, and 77 underwent AS. Multivariable analysis revealed that patients in the RP group had significantly worse sexual function, sexual bother, and urinary function at all time points compared with patients in the AS group. Differences in mental health between groups were below the threshold for clinical significance at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, no differences in mental health outcomes were observed, but urinary and sexual HRQoL were worse for patients who underwent RP compared with those who underwent AS for up to 3 years. These data offer support for the management of low-risk PCa with AS as a means for postponing the morbidity associated with RP without concomitant declines in mental health.

The Importance of Training and Assessing Quality Control Reviewers in Technology-Enabled Abstraction of Real-World Data: A Case Study.

Accurate cancer registry data is crucial for understanding cancer prevention and treatment strategies. Proper education and training are key for successful quality control (QC) programs and an evaluation process is needed to assess effectiveness. Syapse developed a rigorous QC training program that includes a peer review process to assess data quality and an interrater review (IRR) program to evaluate the consistency of QC reviewers. In reviewing IRR cases, we found high rates of agreement in various cancer types: colon (97.74%), prostate (97.75%), ovarian (96.31%), lung (98.03%), breast (97.86%), and bladder (97.88%). A peer review experience questionnaire was also administered. Results indicated that the program facilitated the acquisition of new skills. Through the implementation of robust QC training and assessment procedures for technology-enabled data curation, our Oncology Data Specialist (ODS)-certified professionals at Syapse ensure data quality in a real-world evidence (RWE) platform. QC reviewers deserve an extensive investment in training and professional development to uphold data quality and support cancer research efforts.

Quality Assurance and Technology-Enabled Curation of Oncology Real-World Data: The Importance of Individual Quality Reviews.

Quality assurance is the foundation of clinical data abstraction. Meaningful insights can only be drawn from quality data. Through the development of robust quality-control processes for technology-enabled curation, Syapse's certified tumor registrars enrich real-world oncology data, supporting oncology patient care and research for a network of community health systems.

A prospective analysis of health-related quality of life in intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients managed with intensity modulated radiation therapy, with vs. without hormonal therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Combined radiotherapy and hormonal treatment are recommended for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (CaP). This study compared the long-term effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of intermediate- and high-risk CaP patients managed with radiation therapy (RT) with vs. without hormone therapy (HT). METHODS: Patients with intermediate- and high-risk CaP enrolled in the Center for Prostate Disease Research diagnosed from 2007 to 2017 were included. EPIC and SF-36 questionnaires were completed and HRQoL scores were compared for patients receiving RT vs. RT + HT at baseline (pretreatment), 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months after CaP diagnosis. Longitudinal patterns of change in HRQoL were modeled using linear regression models, adjusting for baseline HRQoL, age at CaP diagnosis, race, comorbidities, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk stratum, time to treatment, and follow-up time. RESULTS: Of 164 patients, 93 (56.7%) received RT alone and 71 (43.3%) received RT + HT. Both groups reported comparable baseline HRQoL. Patients receiving RT+HT were more likely to be NCCN high risk as compared to those receiving only RT. The RT + HT patients experienced worse sexual function, hormonal function, and hormonal bother than those who only received RT; however, HRQoL recovered over time for the RT + HT group. No significant differences were observed between groups in urinary and bowel domains or SF-36 mental and physical scores. CONCLUSION: Combined RT + HT treatment was associated with temporary lower scores in sexual and hormonal HRQoL compared with RT only. Intermediate- and high-risk CaP patients should be counseled about the possible declines in HRQoL associated with HT.

A prospective study of health-related quality-of-life outcomes for patients with low-risk prostate cancer managed by active surveillance or radiation therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) often have excellent oncologic outcomes. However, treatment with curative intent can lead to decrements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients treated with radical prostatectomy have been shown to suffer declines in urinary and sexual HRQoL as compared to those managed with active surveillance (AS). Similarly, patients treated with external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) are hypothesized to experience greater declines in bowel HRQoL. As health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) concerns are paramount when selecting among treatment options for low-risk PCa, this study examined HRQoL outcomes in men undergoing EBRT as compared to AS in a prospective, racially diverse cohort. METHODS: A prospective study of HRQoL in patients with PCa enrolled in the Center for Prostate Disease Research (CPDR) Multicenter National Database was initiated in 2007. The current study included patients diagnosed through April 2014. HRQoL was assessed with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (SF-36). Temporal changes in HRQoL were compared for patients with low-risk PCa managed on AS vs. EBRT at baseline, 1-, 2-, and 3 years post-PCa diagnosis. Longitudinal patterns were modeled using linear regression models fitted with generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusting for baseline HRQoL, demographic, and clinical patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 499 eligible patients with low-risk PCa, 103 (21%) selected AS and 60 (12%) were treated with EBRT. Demographic characteristics of the treatment groups were similar, though a greater proportion of patients in the EBRT group were African American (P = 0.0003). At baseline, both treatment groups reported comparable HRQoL. EBRT patients experienced significantly worse bowel function and bother at 1 year (adjusted mean score: 87 vs. 95, P = 0.001 and 89 vs. 95, P = 0.008, respectively) and 2 years (87 vs. 93, P = 0.007 and 87 vs. 96, P = 0.002, respectively) compared to patients managed on AS. In contrast to those on AS, more than half the number of patients who received EBRT experienced a decline in bowel function (52% vs. 17%, p=0.003) and bother (52% vs. 15%, P = 0.002) from baseline to 1 year. Patients who received EBRT were significantly more likely to experience a decrease in more than one functional domain (urinary, sexual, bowel, or hormonal) at 1 year when compared with those on AS (60% vs. 28%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving EBRT for low-risk prostate cancer suffer declines in bowel HRQoL. These declines are not experienced by patients on AS, suggesting that management of low-risk prostate cancer with AS may offer a means for preserving HRQoL following prostate cancer diagnosis.