Dataset Information

Fear of Recurrence in Prostate Cancer Patients: A Cross-sectional Study After Radical Prostatectomy or Active Surveillance.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Fear of recurrence (FoR) is a distressing consequence of cancer. Little is known about the prevalence of FoR in different treatment groups and factors associated with FoR among prostate cancer (PCa) survivors.

Objective

To investigate the prevalence of high FoR among PCa survivors after radical prostatectomy (RP) or under active surveillance (AS) and to explore clinical and psychological factors potentially associated with FoR.

Design setting and participants

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of 606 patients with PCa, treated with either RP (n = 442) or AS (n = 164) at two Norwegian regional hospitals. The 440 patients (73%) who gave consent to participate were invited in 2017 to complete a questionnaire measuring FoR, self-rated health, adverse effects, and psychological factors at a mean of 4.1 yr (standard deviation 1.7) after their treatment decision. Clinical data were retrieved from medical records.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

FoR was measured using the Concerns About Recurrence Questionnaire, with high FoR defined as a sum score of =12 points (range 0-40). Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, factors associated with high FoR were identified.

Results and limitations

One-third of the participants had high FoR; scores were higher in the AS group and in the RP group with treatment failure. Younger age was significantly associated with high FoR in the AS group, while high prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, biochemical recurrence, positive surgical margin, higher fatigue, and a type D personality were significantly associated with high FoR in the RP group.

Conclusions

At 4 yr after a diagnosis of PCa, high FoR was common, especially among AS patients and among RP patients with treatment failure.

Patient summary

In this study, we examined fear that their disease will return or progress among prostate cancer survivors. We found that such fear was common, especially among young patients under active surveillance and among radical prostatectomy patients with treatment failure or with certain psychological features.

SUBMITTER: Nilsson R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8317872 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate estimation of recurrence risk is needed for optimal treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients. We combined classical clinicopathological predictors of biochemical recurrence (BCR) and molecular markers into a new risk score for predicting BCR after radical prostatectomy (RP). A retrospective study which included 122 PCa patients who attended our department between 2000 and 2007 was conducted. Total RNA was isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin embedded PCa tissue. Gene expression patterns were analyzed in 21 selected samples from 7 localized, 6 locally advanced, and 8 metastatic PCa patients using Illumina microarrays. Expression levels of 41 genes were validated by quantitative PCR in an independent retrospective series of 101 patients with ≥ 10 years follow-up who underwent RP for clinically localized PCa. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to identify individual predictors of BCR. A risk score (RS) for predicting BCR including clinicopathological and gene expression data was developed and Kaplan-Meier curves were generated. Interaction networks between the genes of the model were built by GeneMANIA Cytoscape plugin. In a median follow-up of 120 months (range 3-190), 37 patients developed BCR (36.6%). Expression levels of 7,930 transcripts differed between clinically localized and locally advanced-metastatic PCa groups (FDR<0.1). A set of 41 genes were validated by quantitative PCR. Regression analysis showed that expression of ASF1B and MCL1 as well as Gleason score, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion and positive margins were independent prognostic factors of BCR. A RS generated using these gene expression and clinicopathological variables was able to discriminate between two groups of patients with a significantly different probability of BCR (HR 6.24; CI 3.23-12.4, p<0.01), improving the individual discriminative performance of each of these variables on their own. Direct interactions between the two genes of the model were not found. In conclusion, identification of new gene expression patterns associated with a high probability of BCR in clinically localized PCa patients treated with RP, and their combination with clinicopathological variables in a robust, easy-to-use and reliable classifier may contribute to improve PCa risk stratification and, consequently, to tailor treatment and surveillance strategies in these patients.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to describe Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of localized prostate cancer patients in an Active Surveillance (AS) program, and to compare them with those undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP), external-beam radiotherapy (XRT) and brachytherapy (BT).MethodsMulti-institutional pooled cross-sectional analysis on patients in an AS protocol: < 75 years old; pathologically confirmed LPC (maximum of three positive cylinders); Gleason score < 3 + 4; clinical stage T1a-T2b; and PSA < 15 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria for this study were: less than 6 months in AS, termination of AS protocol, or incomplete data. Patients in AS were matched with those treated with RP, XRT or BT from the 'Spanish Multicentric Study of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer' cohort according to risk group, time from treatment selection to HRQoL survey, and age. Prostate-specific (EPIC) and generic (SF-36) HRQoL instruments were completed. Analysis was stratified by HRQoL survey moment (>or < 2.5 years from treatment selection), and age (>or < 70 years old).ResultsMedian of time from treatment selection to HRQoL survey in the total 396 patients (99 per treatment group) was 2.4 years (range 0.5-8.3). Patients in AS presented higher (better) urinary incontinence scores than RP ones in both stratus of time from treatment selection to HRQoL survey (92.6 vs 67.0 and 81.4 vs 64.4, p < 0.01). Patients in AS for < 2.5 years presented greater sexual scores than any active treatment (p < 0.01), but only statistically higher than RP for those in AS for longer than 2.5 years. The magnitude of the differences between AS and RP groups in both EPIC domains ranged from moderate (0.7 SD) to large (1.0 SD). Regardless of treatment applied, patients presented similar and slightly increased SF-36 scores than US general population reference norms. Nonetheless, patients in AS for < 2.5 years reported worse outcomes than other treatment groups on physical health domains, especially in bodily pain (0.5-0.6 SD), and vitality (0.6-0.8 SD).ConclusionsConsidering patients' well-being, AS can be a good therapeutic option due to the low impact caused on urinary continence and sexual function. However, longitudinal studies are required to take into account HRQoL evolution over time.