Dataset Information

Detailing sexual outcomes after treatment of localised prostate cancer with focal therapy using various energy sources: protocol for a mixed-methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Focal therapy has emerged as a promising treatment option for men with localised prostate cancer. However, most of the evaluation of postoperative function has taken place at a relatively high, non-granular level. Most of the data we use to provide informed consent for our patients is obtained from retrospective series, or derived from prospective studies whose primary outcome was oncological. Finally, most studies have focused on erectile function and overlooked other, presumably important, elements of male sexual function. The present study aims at studying in-depth the sexual consequences of focal therapy with various energy sources.

Methods and analysis

This will be a mixed-methods research study based on a retrospective and prospective cohort, recruited in parallel. The retrospective cohort will consist of patients treated with focal irreversible electroporation, and the prospective cohort of patients treated with three focal therapy energies. Participants will be recruited from two UK urology centres, one National Health Service and one private. On consent, patients will fill in self-administered validated questionnaires (International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15), Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF)) and semistructured interviews will be organised to collect patients' expectations and postoperative changes in domains such as erection, ejaculation, orgasm, libido/sexual desire, masculinity/virility, penile morphology, pain or discomfort, regret, shame, cancer-related stress, overall impact and partner satisfaction. An exploratory thematic analysis will be performed to detail recurring themes that will be grouped into clusters of experiences. We will then be able to find clusters of agreement and disagreement that will be illustrated using exemplar patient quotations.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained (Regional Ethics Committee reference 20/NW/0335), as well as Health Research Authority approval. Results will be published in open-access peer-reviewed journals. Findings will also be translated into patient information resources (leaflets, online information sheets).

Trial registration number

ISRCTN11634296; Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Fiard G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7745515 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Detailing sexual outcomes after treatment of localised prostate cancer with focal therapy using various energy sources: protocol for a mixed-methods study.

Fiard Gaelle G Kelly Daniel D Yap Tet T Emberton Mark M

BMJ open 20201215 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>Focal therapy has emerged as a promising treatment option for men with localised prostate cancer. However, most of the evaluation of postoperative function has taken place at a relatively high, non-granular level. Most of the data we use to provide informed consent for our patients is obtained from retrospective series, or derived from prospective studies whose primary outcome was oncological. Finally, most studies have focused on erectile function and overlooked other, pres ...[more]

PMID: 33323452

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Radical whole-gland therapy can lead to significant genitourinary and rectal side-effects for men with localised prostate cancer. We report on whether selective focal ablation of unifocal and multifocal cancer lesions can reduce this treatment burden. METHODS:Men aged 45-80 years were eligible for this prospective development study if they had low-risk to high-risk localised prostate cancer (prostate specific antigen [PSA] ?15 ng/mL, Gleason score ?4?+?3, stage ?T2), with no previous androgen deprivation or treatment for prostate cancer, and who could safely undergo multiparametric MRI and have a general anaesthetic. Patients received focal therapy using high-intensity focused ultrasound, delivered to all known cancer lesions, with a margin of normal tissue, identified on multiparametric MRI, template prostate-mapping biopsies, or both. Primary endpoints were adverse events (serious and otherwise) and urinary symptoms and erectile function assessed using patient questionnaires. Analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00561314. FINDINGS:42 men were recruited between June 27, 2007, and June 30, 2010; one man died from an unrelated cause (pneumonia) 3 months after treatment and was excluded from analyses. After treatment, one man was admitted to hospital for acute urinary retention, and another had stricture interventions requiring hospital admission. Nine men (22%, 95% CI 11-38) had self-resolving, mild to moderate, intermittent dysuria (median duration 5·0 days [IQR 2·5-18·5]). Urinary debris occurred in 14 men (34%, 95% CI 20-51), with a median duration of 14·5 days (IQR 6·0-16·5). Urinary tract infection was noted in seven men (17%, 95% CI 7-32). Median overall International Index of Erectile Function-15 (IIEF-15) scores were similar at baseline and at 12 months (p=0·060), as were median IIEF-15 scores for intercourse satisfaction (p=0·454), sexual desire (p=0·644), and overall satisfaction (p=0·257). Significant deteriorations between baseline and 12 months were noted for IIEF-15 erectile (p=0·042) and orgasmic function (p=0·003). Of 35 men with good baseline function, 31 (89%, 95% CI 73-97) had erections sufficient for penetration 12 months after focal therapy. Median UCLA Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) urinary incontinence scores were similar at baseline as and 12 months (p=0·045). There was an improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms, assessed by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), between baseline and 12 months (p=0·026), but the IPSS-quality of life score showed no difference between baseline and 12 months (p=0·655). All 38 men with no baseline urinary incontinence were leak-free and pad-free by 9 months. All 40 men pad-free at baseline were pad-free by 3 months and maintained pad-free continence at 12 months. No significant difference was reported in median Trial Outcomes Index scores between baseline and 12 months (p=0·113) but significant improvement was shown in median Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Prostate (p=0·045) and median FACT-General scores (p=0·041). No histological evidence of cancer was identified in 30 of 39 men biopsied at 6 months (77%, 95% CI 61-89); 36 (92%, 79-98) were free of clinically significant cancer. After retreatment in four men, 39 of 41 (95%, 95% CI 83-99) had no evidence of disease on multiparametric MRI at 12 months. INTERPRETATION:Focal therapy of individual prostate cancer lesions, whether multifocal or unifocal, leads to a low rate of genitourinary side-effects and an encouraging rate of early absence of clinically significant prostate cancer. FUNDING:Medical Research Council (UK), Pelican Cancer Foundation, and St Peters Trust.

Project description:Although radiotherapy to the prostate for cancer is effective, recurrence occurs in 10-15% within 5 years. Traditional salvage treatments for men with radiorecurrent prostate cancer comprise of watchful waiting (WW) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) or radical prostatectomy (RP). Neither strategy provides ideal therapeutic ratios. Salvage focal ablation is an emerging option. We performed a systematic review of the Medline and Embase databases for studies reporting outcomes of focal salvage brachytherapy (sBT), cryotherapy (sCT) or high-intensity focused ultrasound (sHIFU) for radiorecurrent prostate cancer (conception to April 2019). Results were screened for inclusion against predetermined eligibility criteria. Certain data were extracted, including rates of biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), metastasis, conversion to second-line therapies and adverse events. Of a total 134 articles returned from the search, 15 studies (14 case series and 1 comparative study) reported outcomes after focal sBT [5], sCT [7] and sHIFU [3]. Cohort size varied depending on intervention, with eligible studies of sBT being small case series. Median follow-up ranged from 10 to 56 months. Although pre-salvage demographics were similar [median age range, 61-75 years; prostate-specific antigen (PSA) range, 2.8-5.5 ng/mL], there was heterogeneity in patient selection, individual treatment protocols and outcome reporting. At 3 years, BDFS ranged from 61% to 71.4% after sBT, 48.1-72.4% after sCT and 48% after sHIFU. Only studies of sCT reported 5-year BDFS, which ranged from 46.5% to 54.4%. Rates of metastasis were low after all salvage modalities, as were conversion to second-line therapies (although this was poorly reported). Grade 3 adverse events were rare. This systematic review indicates that salvage focal ablation of radiorecurrent prostate cancer provides acceptable oncological outcomes and is well tolerated. Unfortunately, there is heterogeneity in the study design of existing evidence. Level 1 research comparing salvage focal therapies to existing whole-gland strategies is needed to further establish the role of these promising treatments.

Project description:The incidence of localised prostate cancer is increasing worldwide. In light of recent evidence, current, radical, whole-gland treatments for organ-confined disease have being questioned with respect to their side effects, cancer control, and cost. Focal therapy may be an effective alternative strategy.To systematically review the existing literature on baseline characteristics of the target population; preoperative evaluation to localise disease; and perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes following focal therapy.Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Review databases were searched from inception to 31 October 2012. In addition, registered but not yet published trials were retrieved. Studies evaluating tissue-preserving therapies in men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer in the primary or salvage setting were included.A total of 2350 cases were treated to date across 30 studies. Most studies were retrospective with variable standards of reporting, although there was an increasing number of prospective registered trials. Focal therapy was mainly delivered to men with low and intermediate disease, although some high-risk cases were treated that had known, unilateral, significant cancer. In most of the cases, biopsy findings were correlated to specific preoperative imaging, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging or Doppler ultrasound to determine eligibility. Follow-up varied between 0 and 11.1 yr. In treatment-naïve prostates, pad-free continence ranged from 95% to 100%, erectile function ranged from 54% to 100%, and absence of clinically significant cancer ranged from 83% to 100%. In focal salvage cases for radiotherapy failure, the same outcomes were achieved in 87.2-100%, 29-40%, and 92% of cases, respectively. Biochemical disease-free survival was reported using a number of definitions that were not validated in the focal-therapy setting.Our systematic review highlights that, when focal therapy is delivered with intention to treat, the perioperative, functional, and disease control outcomes are encouraging within a short- to medium-term follow-up. Focal therapy is a strategy by which the overtreatment burden of the current prostate cancer pathway could be reduced, but robust comparative effectiveness studies are now required.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer (LPC) wanting curative treatment face a highly preference-sensitive choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy, which offer similar cure rates but different side effects. This study aims to determine the information, decision-making needs and preferences of men with LPC choosing between robotic prostatectomy and standard external beam or stereotactic radiotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This study will be conducted at a large public teaching hospital in Australia offering the choice between robotic prostatectomy and radiotherapy from early 2017. Men (20-30) diagnosed with LPC who want curative treatment and meet criteria for either treatment will be invited to participate. In this mixed-methods study, patients will complete semistructured interviews before and after attending a combined clinic in which they consult a urologist and a radiation oncologist regarding treatment and four questionnaires (one before treatment decision-making and three after) assessing demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement in decision-making, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret. Combined clinic consultations will also be audio-recorded and clinicians will report their perceptions regarding patients' suitability for, openness to and preferences for each treatment. Qualitative data will be transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed and descriptive statistical analyses will explore quantitative decision-making outcomes, with comparison according to treatment choice. DISCUSSION:Results from this study will inform how to best support men diagnosed with LPC deciding which curative treatment option best suits their needs and may identify the need for and content required in a decision aid to support these men. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:All participants will provide written informed consent. Data will be rigorously managed in accordance with national legislation. Results will be disseminated via presentations to both scientific and layperson audiences and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Project description:In 2014, nursing home administration and government officials were facing increasing public and media scrutiny around the variation of antipsychotic medication (APM) prescribing across Ontario nursing homes. In response, policy makers partnered to test an academic detailing (AD) intervention to address appropriate prescribing of APM in nursing homes in a cluster-randomized trial. This mixed-methods study aimed to explore how and why the AD intervention may have resulted in changes in the nursing home context. The objectives were to understand how the intervention was implemented, explore contextual factors associated with implementation, and examine impact of the intervention on prescribing.Administrative data for the primary outcome of the full randomized trial will not be available for a minimum of 1 year. Therefore, this paper reports the findings of a planned, quantitative interim trial analysis assessed mean APM dose and prescribing prevalence at baseline and 3 and 6 months across 40 nursing homes (18 intervention, 22 control). Patient-level administrative data regarding prescribing were analyzed using generalized linear mixed effects regression. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nursing home staff from the intervention group to explore opinions and experiences of the AD intervention. Interviews were analyzed using the framework method, with constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) applied as pre-defined deductive codes. Open coding was applied when emerging themes did not align with CFIR constructs. Qualitative and quantitative findings were triangulated to examine points of divergence to understand how the intervention may work and to identify areas for future opportunities and areas for improvement.No significant differences were observed in prescribing outcomes. A total of 22 interviews were conducted, including four academic detailers and 18 nursing home staff. Constructs within the CFIR domains of Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Characteristics of Individuals presented barriers to antipsychotic prescribing. Intervention Source, Evidence Strength and Quality, and Adaptability explained participant engagement in the AD intervention; nursing homes that exhibited a Tension for Change and Leadership Engagement reported positive changes in processes and communication.Participants described their experiences with the intervention against the backdrop of a range of factors that influence APM prescribing in nursing homes that exist at the system, facility, provider, and resident levels. In this context, the perceived credibility and flexibility of the intervention were critical features that explained engagement with and potential impact of the intervention. Development of a common language across the team to enable communication was reported as a proximal outcome that may eventually have an effect on APM prescribing rates. Process evaluations may be useful during early stages of evaluation to understand how the intervention is working and how it might work better. Qualitative results suggest the lack of early changes observed in prescribing may reflect the number of upstream factors that need to change for APM rates to decrease.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02604056.

Dataset Information

Detailing sexual outcomes after treatment of localised prostate cancer with focal therapy using various energy sources: protocol for a mixed-methods study.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Trial registration number

Publications

Detailing sexual outcomes after treatment of localised prostate cancer with focal therapy using various energy sources: protocol for a mixed-methods study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets