Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/137112
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Patient-reported functional outcome measures and treatment choice for prostate cancer
Author: Tiruye, T.
O’Callaghan, M.
Moretti, K.
Jay, A.
Higgs, B.
Santoro, K.
Boyle, T.
Ettridge, K.
Beckmann, K.
Citation: BMC Urology, 2022; 22(1)
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Issue Date: 2022
ISSN: 1471-2490
1471-2490
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Tenaw Tiruye, Michael O, Callaghan, Kim Moretti, Alex Jay, Braden Higgs, Kerry Santoro, Terry Boyle, Kerry Ettridge, and Kerri Beckmann
Abstract: Background The aim of this study was to describe changes in patient-reported functional outcome measures (PROMs) comparing pre-treatment and 12 months after radical prostatectomy (RP), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), brachytherapy and active surveillance (AS). Methods Men enrolled from 2010 to 2019 in the South Australian Prostate Cancer Clinical Outcomes Collaborative registry a prospective clinical registry were studied. Urinary, bowel, and sexual functions were measured using Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) at baseline and 12 months post-treatment. Higher scores on the EPIC-26 indicate better function. Multivariable regression models were applied to compare differences in function and extent of bother by treatment. Results Of the 4926 eligible men, 57.0% underwent RP, 20.5% EBRT, 7.0% brachytherapy and 15.5% AS. While baseline urinary and bowel function varied little across treatment groups, sexual function differed greatly (adjusted mean scores: RP = 56.3, EBRT = 45.8, brachytherapy = 61.4, AS = 52.8; p < 0.001). Post-treatment urinary continence and sexual function declined in all treatment groups, with the greatest decline for sexual function after RP (adjusted mean score change − 28.9). After adjustment for baseline differences, post-treatment sexual function scores after EBRT (6.4; 95%CI, 0.9–12.0) and brachytherapy (17.4; 95%CI, 9.4–25.5) were higher than after RP. Likewise, urinary continence after EBRT (13.6; 95%CI, 9.0-18.2), brachytherapy (10.6; 95%CI, 3.9–17.3) and AS (10.6; 95%CI, 5.9–15.3) were higher than after RP. Conversely, EBRT was associated with lower bowel function (− 7.9; 95%CI, − 12.4 to − 3.5) than RP. EBRT and AS were associated with lower odds of sexual bother (OR 0.51; 95%CI, 0.29–0.89 and OR 0.60; 95%CI, 0.38–0.96, respectively), and EBRT with higher odds of bowel bother (OR 2.01; 95%CI, 1.23–3.29) compared with RP. Conclusion The four common treatment approaches for prostate cancer were associated with different patterns of patient-reported functional outcomes, both pre- and 12 months post-treatment. However, after adjustment, RP was associated with a greater decline in urinary continence and sexual function than other treatments. This study underscores the importance of collecting baseline PROMs to interpret post-treatment functional outcomes.
Keywords: Prostate cancer; Patient reported outcome measure; Quality of life; Australia
Rights: © The Author(s) 2022. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-022-01117-1
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/GNT1124210
Published version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01117-1
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_137112.pdfPublished version1.67 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.