Psychological aspects of active surveillance

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 237-242

  Van Den Bergh, Roderick C N ^a,b   Korfage, Ida J ^a   Bangma, Chris H ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

active surveillance; expectant management; prostate cancer; psychological; quality of life

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; ANXIETY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; COGNITIVE THERAPY; CONSULTATION; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; DISTRESS SYNDROME; EDUCATION; FEAR; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEAR; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MENTAL HEALTH; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SELECTION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TIME FACTORS; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURES; WATCHFUL WAITING;

EID: 84859651005     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: 14736586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e328351dcb1     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Klotz L, Zhang L, Lam A, et al. Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large, active surveillance cohort with localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28:126-131; Epub 2009 Nov 16.
2. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR. Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol 2007; 178 (3 Pt 2):S14-S19. (Pubitemid 47224952)
3. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Fine J. 20-year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 2005; 293:2095-2101. (Pubitemid 40617061)
4. Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:1250-1261. (Pubitemid 351439226)
5. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, et al. SPCG-4 Investigators. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:1708-1717.
6. Miocinovic R, Jones JS, Pujara AC, et al. Acceptance and durability of surveillance as a management choice in men with screen-detected, low-risk prostate cancer: improved outcomes with stringent enrollment criteria. Urology 2011; 77:980-984. Article from the Cleveland Clinic. All patients with low-risk prostate cancer were offered active surveillance, a relatively high percentage of 57% accepted this strategy. The treatment-free survival was high on short term.
7. Zeliadt SB, Moinpour CM, Blough DK, et al. Preliminary treatment considerations among men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Am J Manag Care 2010; 16:e121-e130. Survey on the treatment decision-making process in men diagnosed with prostate cancer, but before treatment.
8. Xu J, Dailey RK, Eggly S, et al. Men's perspectives on selecting their prostate cancer treatment. J Natl Med Assoc 2011; 103:468-478. Semistructured interviews in 21 men with prostate cancer aiming to understand influences in treatment choice.
9. van den Bergh RC, van Vugt HA, Korfage IJ, et al. Disease insight and treatment perception of men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 105:322-328.
10. van den Bergh RC, Essink-Bot ML, Roobol MJ, et al. Anxiety and distress during active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Cancer 2009; 115:3868-3878.
11. van Vugt HA, Roobol MJ, van der Poel HG, et al. Selecting men diagnosed with prostate cancer for active surveillance using a risk calculator: a prospective impact study. BJU Int 2011. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10679.x. [Epub ahead of print] A risk calculation of the presence of indolent prostate cancer was performed in all men diagnosed with assumed low-risk disease. Fixed cutoff points were applied to advise men to either undergo active therapy or active surveillance. Although this risk calculator's recommendation was followed by most patients, some still chose active surveillance even when active therapy was recommended.
12. Steginga SK, Turner E, Donovan J. The decision-related psychosocial concerns of men with localised prostate cancer: targets for intervention and research. World J Urol 2008; 26:469-474.
13. Gorin MA, Soloway CT, Eldefrawy A, Soloway MS. Factors that influence patient enrollment in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Urology 2011; 77:588-591. Survey by mail in 105 patients on active surveillance. An important role of the treating physician in choosing active surveillance was found.
14. Davison BJ, Goldenberg SL. Patient acceptance of active surveillance as a treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2011; 108:1787-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10200.x. Article exploring coping strategies of men on active surveillance.
15. Isebaert S, Van Audenhove C, Haustermans K, et al. Evaluating a decision aid for patients with localized prostate cancer in clinical practice. Urol Int 2008; 81:383-388.
16. van den Bergh RC, Essink-Bot ML, Roobol MJ, et al. Do anxiety and distress increase during active surveillance for low risk prostate cancer? J Urol 2010; 183:1786-1791. Article comparing QoL-scores at two different moments after diagnosis in a prospective active surveillance study. Favourable results were found on short-term.
17. Vasarainen H, Lokman U, Ruutu M, et al. Prostate cancer active surveillance and health-related quality of life: results of the Finnish arm of the prospective trial. BJU Int. 2011. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10677.x. [Epub ahead of print] Eighty patients included in the Finnish part of the prospective PRIAS study were followed for 1 year after diagnosis. No QoL disturbances were found and no patients stopped active surveillance due to anxiety. Some of the health-related QoL scores were even better than the general Finnish population.
18. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Klotz L. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: progress and promise. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29:3669-3676. Review article on the rationale behind and recent developments of active surveillance. It provides an overview of different ongoing prospective active surveillance cohorts.
19. Latini DM, Hart SL, Knight SJ, et al. CaPSURE Investigators. The relationship between anxiety and time to treatment for patients with prostate cancer on surveillance. J Urol 2007; 178(3 Pt 1):826-831.
20. Kasperzyk JL, Shappley WV 3rd, Kenfield SA, et al. Watchful waiting and quality of life among prostate cancer survivors in the physicians' health study. J Urol 2011; 186:1862-1867. Epub 2011 Sep 23. Study in 125 patients with prostate cancer, initially managed expectantly, in the Physicians Health Study. A benefit in QoL was found for a selection of patients with low-risk disease. Younger age and higher disease stage and grade predicted the switch from active surveillance to radical therapy.
21. Thong MS, Mols F, Kil PJ, et al. Prostate cancer survivors who would be eligible for active surveillance but were either treated with radiotherapy or managed expectantly: comparisons on long-term quality of life and symptom burden. BJU Int 2010; 105:652-658.
22. Arredondo SA, Downs TM, Lubeck DP, et al. Watchful waiting and health related quality of life for patients with localized prostate cancer: data from CaPSURE. J Urol 2008; 179 (5 Suppl):S14-S18. (Pubitemid 351492524)
23. Burnet KL, Parker C, Dearnaley D, et al. Does active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer carry psychological morbidity? BJU Int 2007; 100:540-543. (Pubitemid 47205468)
24. Wallace M. Uncertainty and quality of life of older men who undergo watchful waiting for prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2003; 30:303-309.
25. Fujita K, Landis P, McNeil BK, Pavlovich CP. Serial prostate biopsies are associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol 2009; 182:2664-2669.
26. Hayes JH, Ollendorf DA, Pearson SD, et al. Active surveillance compared with initial treatment for men with low-risk prostate cancer: a decision analysis. JAMA 2010; 304:2373-2380. A decision analysis simulation model was used to compare QoL-adjusted life years of different treatment options for a 65-year-old patient diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. The most favorable results were found for active surveillance under a wide range of assumptions.
27. Hegarty JM, Wallace M, Comber H. Uncertainty and quality of life among men undergoing active surveillance for prostate cancer in the United States and Ireland. Am J Mens Health 2008; 2:133-142.
28. Oliffe JL, Davison BJ, Pickles T, Mróz L. The self-management of uncertainty among men undertaking active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer. Qual Health Res 2009; 19:432-443.
29. Pickles T, Ruether JD, Weir L, et al. SCRN Communication Team. Psychosocial barriers to active surveillance for the management of early prostate cancer and a strategy for increased acceptance. BJU Int 2007; 100:544-551. (Pubitemid 47205450)
30. Daubenmier JJ, Weidner G, Marlin R, et al. Lifestyle and health-related quality of life of men with prostate cancer managed with active surveillance. Urology 2006; 67:125-130. (Pubitemid 43069270)
31. Steginga SK, Pinnock C, Gardner M, et al. Evaluating peer support for prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Peer Support Inventory. BJU Int 2005; 95:46-50. (Pubitemid 350020868)
32. Chapple A, Ziebland S, Herxheimer A, et al. Is 'watchful waiting' a real choice for men with prostate cancer? A qualitative study. BJU Int 2002; 90:257-264. (Pubitemid 34989073)
33. Penedo FJ, Dahn JR, Molton I, et al. Cognitive-behavioral stress management improves stress-management skills and quality of life in men recovering from treatment of prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100:192-200. (Pubitemid 37553555)
34. Kazer MW, Bailey DE, Sanda M, et al. An internet intervention for management of uncertainty during active surveillance for prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2011; 38:561-568. An Internet intervention helping men managing issues related to active surveillance was found to have a positive effect on QoL in a pilot group of nine men.
35. Bailey DE, Mishel MH, Belyea M, et al. Uncertainty intervention for watchful waiting in prostate cancer. Cancer Nurs 2004; 27:339-346. (Pubitemid 39346525)
36. Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Martin RM, et al. Latest results from the UK trials evaluating prostate cancer screening and treatment: the CAP and ProtecT studies. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46:3095-3101. Large UK-based trial combining randomization for PSA-screening with treatment after diagnosis.