Cargando…

Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES: In a prospective, comparative effectiveness study, we assessed clinical and psychological factors associated with switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT) among low‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: Using ultra‐rapid case identification, we conducted p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Taylor, Kathryn L., Luta, George, Zotou, Vasiliki, Lobo, Tania, Hoffman, Richard M., Davis, Kimberly M., Potosky, Arnold L., Li, Tengfei, Aaronson, David, Van Den Eeden, Stephen K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9045562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35492225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.124
_version_ 1784695343616622592
author Taylor, Kathryn L.
Luta, George
Zotou, Vasiliki
Lobo, Tania
Hoffman, Richard M.
Davis, Kimberly M.
Potosky, Arnold L.
Li, Tengfei
Aaronson, David
Van Den Eeden, Stephen K.
author_facet Taylor, Kathryn L.
Luta, George
Zotou, Vasiliki
Lobo, Tania
Hoffman, Richard M.
Davis, Kimberly M.
Potosky, Arnold L.
Li, Tengfei
Aaronson, David
Van Den Eeden, Stephen K.
author_sort Taylor, Kathryn L.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: In a prospective, comparative effectiveness study, we assessed clinical and psychological factors associated with switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT) among low‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: Using ultra‐rapid case identification, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1139) with low‐risk patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason≤6) and follow‐up interviews 6–10 months post‐diagnosis (N = 1057). Among men remaining on AS for at least 12 months (N = 601), we compared those who continued on AS (N = 515) versus men who underwent delayed AT (N = 86) between 13 and 24 months, using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Delayed AT was predicted by time dependent PSA levels (≥10 vs. <10; HR = 5.6, 95% CI 2.4–13.1) and Gleason scores (≥7 vs. ≤6; adjusted HR = 20.2, 95% CI 12.2–33.4). Further, delayed AT was more likely among men whose urologist initially recommended AT (HR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.07–4.22), for whom tumour removal was very important (HR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.35–3.52), and who reported greater worry about not detecting disease progression early (HR = 1.67, 1.05–2.65). In exploratory analyses, 31% (27/86) switched to AT without evidence of progression, while 4.7% (24/515) remained on AS with evidence of progression. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for clinical evidence of disease progression over the first year post‐diagnosis, we found that urologists' initial treatment recommendation and patients' early treatment preferences and concerns about AS each independently predicted undergoing delayed AT during the second year post‐diagnosis. These findings, along with almost one‐half undergoing delayed AT without evidence of progression, suggest the need for greater decision support to remain on AS when it is clinically indicated.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9045562
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90455622022-04-28 Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study Taylor, Kathryn L. Luta, George Zotou, Vasiliki Lobo, Tania Hoffman, Richard M. Davis, Kimberly M. Potosky, Arnold L. Li, Tengfei Aaronson, David Van Den Eeden, Stephen K. BJUI Compass ORIGINAL ARTICLES OBJECTIVES: In a prospective, comparative effectiveness study, we assessed clinical and psychological factors associated with switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT) among low‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients. METHODS: Using ultra‐rapid case identification, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1139) with low‐risk patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason≤6) and follow‐up interviews 6–10 months post‐diagnosis (N = 1057). Among men remaining on AS for at least 12 months (N = 601), we compared those who continued on AS (N = 515) versus men who underwent delayed AT (N = 86) between 13 and 24 months, using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Delayed AT was predicted by time dependent PSA levels (≥10 vs. <10; HR = 5.6, 95% CI 2.4–13.1) and Gleason scores (≥7 vs. ≤6; adjusted HR = 20.2, 95% CI 12.2–33.4). Further, delayed AT was more likely among men whose urologist initially recommended AT (HR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.07–4.22), for whom tumour removal was very important (HR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.35–3.52), and who reported greater worry about not detecting disease progression early (HR = 1.67, 1.05–2.65). In exploratory analyses, 31% (27/86) switched to AT without evidence of progression, while 4.7% (24/515) remained on AS with evidence of progression. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for clinical evidence of disease progression over the first year post‐diagnosis, we found that urologists' initial treatment recommendation and patients' early treatment preferences and concerns about AS each independently predicted undergoing delayed AT during the second year post‐diagnosis. These findings, along with almost one‐half undergoing delayed AT without evidence of progression, suggest the need for greater decision support to remain on AS when it is clinically indicated. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9045562/ /pubmed/35492225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.124 Text en © 2021 The Authors. BJUI Compass published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International Company. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Taylor, Kathryn L.
Luta, George
Zotou, Vasiliki
Lobo, Tania
Hoffman, Richard M.
Davis, Kimberly M.
Potosky, Arnold L.
Li, Tengfei
Aaronson, David
Van Den Eeden, Stephen K.
Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title_full Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title_fullStr Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title_short Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study
title_sort psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: the patient reported outcomes for prostate care prospective cohort study
topic ORIGINAL ARTICLES
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9045562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35492225
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.124
work_keys_str_mv AT taylorkathrynl psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT lutageorge psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT zotouvasiliki psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT lobotania psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT hoffmanrichardm psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT daviskimberlym psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT potoskyarnoldl psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT litengfei psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT aaronsondavid psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy
AT vandeneedenstephenk psychologicalpredictorsofdelayedactivetreatmentfollowingactivesurveillanceforlowriskprostatecancerthepatientreportedoutcomesforprostatecareprospectivecohortstudy