Patient and provider experiences with active surveillance: A scoping review

PLoS ONE

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2018, Pages

  Kim, Claire ^a   Wright, Frances C ^b   Look Hong, Nicole J ^b   Groot, Gary ^c   Helyer, Lucy ^d   Meiers, Pamela ^c   Quan, May Lynn ^e   Urquhart, Robin ^d   Warburton, Rebecca ^f   Gagliardi, Anna R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

^b SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

^d DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CHRONIC LYMPHATIC LEUKEMIA; COMORBIDITY; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PROSTATE CANCER; QUALITY OF LIFE; RENAL CELL CARCINOMA; SOCIAL STATUS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TUMOR VOLUME; DISEASE EXACERBATION; NEOPLASM; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY;

DISEASE PROGRESSION; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS;

EID: 85041378334     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192097     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Romero-Otero J, García-Gómez B, Duarte-Ojeda JM, Rodríguez-Antolín A, Vilaseca A, Carlsson SV et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2016; 23:211–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju. 13016 PMID: 26621054
2. Bruinsma S, Roobol M, Carroll P, Klotz L, Pickles T, Moore C et al. Expert consensus document: Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer—results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure. Nat Rev Urol. 2017; 14(5):312–322. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2017.26PMID: 28290462
3. Syed JS, Javier-Desloges J, Tatzel S, Bhagat A, Nguyen KA, Hwang K, et al. Current Management Strategy for Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2017; 19:11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-017-0569-6 PMID: 28220449
4. Timilshina N, Ouellet V, Alibhai SM, Mes-Masson AM, Delvoye N, Drachenberg D et al. Analysis of active surveillance uptake for low-risk localized prostate cancer in Canada: a Canadian multi-institu-tional study. World J Urol 2017; 35:595–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1897-0 PMID: 27447989
5. Volpe A. The role of active surveillance of small renal masses. Int J Surg 2016; 36(Pt C):518–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.06.007 PMID: 27321381
6. Ahmad AE, Finelli A, Jewett MA. Surveillance of small renal masses. Urology 2016; 98:8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.06.005 PMID: 27397098
7. Benson JR, Jatoi I, Toi M. Treatment for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: is nothing better than something? Lancet Oncol 2016; 17:e442–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30367-9 PMID: 27733270
8. Nastoupil LJ, Sinha R, Byrtek M, Ziemiecki R, Zhou X, Taylor M et al. Outcomes following watchful waiting for stage II-IV follicular lymphoma patients in the modern era. Br J Haematol 2016; 172:724–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.13895 PMID: 26729445
9. van den Broek EC, Oerlemans S, Nijziel MR, Posthuma EF, Coebergh JW, van de Poll-Franse LV. Impact of active surveillance, chlorambucil, and other therapy on health-related QoL in patients with CLL/SLL in the Netherlands. Ann Hematol 2015; 94:45–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-014-2161-6 PMID: 25038918
10. Tosoian J, Carter H, Lepor A, Loeb S. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: current evidence and contemporary state of practice. Nat Rev Urol. 2016; 13(4):205–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2016.45 PMID: 26954332
11. Ruane-McAteer E, Porter S, O’Sullivan JM, Santin O, Prue G. Active surveillance for favorable-risk prostate cancer: Is there a greater psychological impact than previously thought? A systematic, mixed studies literature review. Psychooncology 2016 https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4311 PMID: 27862602
12. Rittenmeyer L, Huffman D, Alagna M, Moore E. The experience of adults who choose watchful waiting or active surveillance as an approach to medical treatment: a qualitative systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep 2016; 14:174–255.
13. Wennberg JE, Fisher ES, Skinner JS. Geography and the debate over Medicare reform. Health Aff 2002;Suppl Web Exclusives:W96–114.
14. Stewart M, Ryan BL, Bodea C. Is patient-centred care associated with lower diagnostic costs? Healthcare Policy 2011; 6:27–31.
15. Doyle C, Lennox L, Bell D. A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness. BMJ Open 2012; 3:e001570.
16. Rathert C, Wyrwich MD, Boren SA. Patient-centered care and outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev 2013; 70:351–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558712465774 PMID: 23169897
17. Légaré F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff. 2013; 32:276–84.
18. Chung MS, Lee SH. Current status of active surveillance in prostate cancer. Investig Clin Uro 2016; 57:14–20.
19. Leapman MS, Cowan JE, Nguyen HG, Shinohara KK, Perez N, Cooperberg MR et al. Active Surveillance in Younger Men With Prostate Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:1898–1904. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.68.0058 PMID: 28346806
20. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005; 8:19–32.
21. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6:e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 PMID: 19621072
22. McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 75:40–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021 PMID: 27005575
23. Albrecht L, Archibald M, Arseneau D, Scott SD. Development of a checklist to assess the quality of reporting of knowledge translation interventions using the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER) recommendations. Implement Sci 2013; 8: 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-52 PMID: 23680355
24. McCaffery K, Nickel B, Moynihan R, Hersch J, Teixeira-Pinto A, Irwig L et al. How different terminology for ductal carcinoma in situ impacts women’s concern and treatment preferences: a randomised comparison within a national community survey. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(11):e008094. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmjopen-2015-008094 PMID: 26525720
25. Nickel B, Barratt A, Hersch J, Moynihan R, Irwig L, McCaffery K. How different terminology for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) impacts women’s concern and management preferences: A qualitative study. The Breast. 2015; 24(5):673–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2015.08.004 PMID: 26376460
26. Holtzer-Goor K, Schaafsma M, Joosten P, Posthuma E, Wittebol S, Huijgens P et al. QoL of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in the Netherlands: results of a longitudinal multicentre study. Qual Life Res. 2015; 24(12):2895–2906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1039-y PMID: 26205768
27. van den Broek E, Oerlemans S, Nijziel M, Posthuma E, Coebergh J, van de Poll-Franse L. Impact of active surveillance, chlorambucil, and other therapy on health-related QoL in patients with CLL/SLL in the Netherlands. Ann Hematol. 2014; 94(1):45–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-014-2161-6 PMID: 25038918
28. Evans J, Ziebland S, Pettitt A. Incurable, invisible and inconclusive: watchful waiting for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and implications for doctor-patient communication. Eur J Cancer Care. 2012; 21 (1):67–77.
29. Levin T, Li Y, Riskind J, Rai K. Depression, anxiety and QoL in a chronic lymphocytic leukemia cohort. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2007; 29(3):251–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2007.01.014PMID: 17484943
30. Maurice M, Zhu H, Kiechle J, Kim S, Abouassaly R. Nonclinical Factors Predict Selection of Initial Observation for Renal Cell Carcinoma. Urology. 2015; 86(5):892–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.06.057 PMID: 26291563
31. Parker P, Alba F, Fellman B, Urbauer D, Li Y, Karam J et al. Illness Uncertainty and QoL of Patients with Small Renal Tumors Undergoing Watchful Waiting: A 2-year Prospective Study. European Urology. 2013; 63(6):1122–1127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.034 PMID: 23419322
32. Smaldone M, Churukanti G, Simhan J, Kim S, Reyes J, Zhu F et al. Clinical Characteristics Associated With Treatment Type for Localized Renal Tumors: Implications for Practice Pattern Assessment. Urology. 2013; 81(2):269–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.09.035 PMID: 23374778
33. Sun M, Abdollah F, Bianchi M, Trinh Q, Jeldres C, Thuret R et al. Treatment Management of Small Renal Masses in the 21st Century: A Paradigm Shift. Ann of Surg Oncol. 2012; 19(7):2380–2387.
34. Jacobs B, Tan H, Montgomery J, Weizer A, Wood D, Miller D et al. Understanding Criteria for Surveillance of Patients With a Small Renal Mass. Urology. 2012; 79(5):1027–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.12.052 PMID: 22546379
35. Breau R, Crispen P, Jenkins S, Blute M, Leibovich B. Treatment of Patients With Small Renal Masses: A Survey of the American Urological Association. The Journal of Urology. 2011; 185(2):407–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.092 PMID: 21168170
36. Bayliss D, Duff J, Stricker P, Walker K. Decision-Making in Prostate Cancer: Active Surveillance Over Other Treatment Options. Urol Nurs. 2016; 36(3):141–149. PMID: 27501595
37. Parker P, Davis J, Latini D, Baum G, Wang X, Ward J et al. Relationship between illness uncertainty, anxiety, fear of progression and QoL in men with favourable-risk prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance. BJU Int. 2016; 117(3):469–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13099 PMID: 25714186
38. Hurwitz L, Cullen J, Elsamanoudi S, Kim D, Hudak J, Colston M et al. A prospective cohort study of treatment decision-making for prostate cancer following participation in a multidisciplinary clinic. Urol Oncol: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2016; 34(5):233.e17–233.e25.
39. Loeb S, Curnyn C, Fagerlin A, Braithwaite R, Schwartz M, Lepor H et al. Qualitative study on decision-making by prostate cancer physicians during active surveillance. BJU Int. 2016.
40. Pham K, Cullen J, Hurwitz L, Wolff E, Levie K, Odem-Davis K et al. Prospective QoL in Men Choosing Active Surveillance Compared to Those Biopsied but not Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer. The Journal of Urology. 2016; 196(2):392–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2972 PMID: 26976206
41. Tan H, Marks L, Hoyt M, Kwan L, Filson C, Macairan M et al. The Relationship between Intolerance of Uncertainty and Anxiety in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. The Journal of Urology. 2016; 195(6):1724–1730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.108 PMID: 26872841
42. Taylor K, Hoffman R, Davis K, Luta G, Leimpeter A, Lobo T et al. Treatment Preferences for Active Surveillance versus Active Treatment among Men with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers & Prev. 2016; 25(8):1240–1250.
43. Chu W, Kim B, Slezak J, Harrison T, Gelfond J, Jacobsen S et al. The effect of urologist experience on choosing active surveillance for prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2015; 33(11):1701–1706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1528-1 PMID: 25761737
44. Wade J, Holding P, Bonnington S, Rooshenas L, Lane J, Salter C et al. Establishing nurse-led active surveillance for men with localised prostate cancer: development and formative evaluation of a model of care in the ProtecT trial. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(9):e008953. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008953 PMID: 26384727
45. Kayser L, Hansen-Nord N, Osborne R, Tjønneland A, Hansen R. Responses and relationship dynamics of men and their spouses during active surveillance for prostate cancer: health literacy as an inquiry framework. BMC Public Health. 2015; 15(1).
46. Watts S, Leydon G, Eyles C, Moore C, Richardson A, Birch B et al. A quantitative analysis of the prevalence of clinical depression and anxiety in patients with prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(5):e006674–e006674. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006674 PMID: 26002689
47. Yanez B, Bustillo N, Antoni M, Lechner S, Dahn J, Kava B et al. The importance of perceived stress management skills for patients with prostate cancer in active surveillance. J Behav Med. 2015; 38 (2):214–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-014-9594-1 PMID: 25234859
48. Volk R, Kinsman G, Le Y, Swank P, Blumenthal-Barby J, McFall S et al. Designing Normative Messages About Active Surveillance for Men With Localized Prostate Cancer. J Health Commun. 2015; 20 (9):1014–1020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2015.1018618 PMID: 26066011
49. Jeldres C, Cullen J, Hurwitz L, Wolff E, Levie K, Odem-Davis K et al. Prospective quality-of-life outcomes for low-risk prostate cancer: Active surveillance versus radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 2015; 121(14):2465–2473. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29370 PMID: 25845467
50. Venderbos L, van den Bergh R, Roobol M, Schröder F, Essink-Bot M, Bangma C et al. A longitudinal study on the impact of active surveillance for prostate cancer on anxiety and distress levels. Psycho-Oncology. 2015; 24(3):348–354. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3657 PMID: 25138075
51. Ravi P, Karakiewicz P, Roghmann F, Gandaglia G, Choueiri T, Menon M et al. Mental health outcomes in elderly men with prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2014; 32(8):1333–1340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.05.005 PMID: 25153773
52. O’Callaghan C, Dryden T, Hyatt A, Brooker J, Burney S, Wootten A et al. ‘What is this active surveillance thing?’ Men’s and partners’ reactions to treatment decision making for prostate cancer when active surveillance is the recommended treatment option. Psycho-Oncology. 2014; 23(12):1391–1398. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3576 PMID: 24830805
53. Anderson J, Burney S, Brooker J, Ricciardelli L, Fletcher J, Satasivam P et al. Anxiety in the management of localised prostate cancer by active surveillance. BJU Int. 2014; 114:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12765 PMID: 25070423
54. Kim S, Gross C, Nguyen P, Smaldone M, Shah N, Karnes R et al. Perceptions of Active Surveillance and Treatment Recommendations for Low-risk Prostate Cancer. Medical Care. 2014; 52(7):579–585. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000155 PMID: 24926704
55. Wilcox C, Gilbourd D, Louie-Johnsun M. Anxiety and health-related QoL (HRQL) in patients undergoing active surveillance of prostate cancer in an Australian centre. BJU Int. 2014; 113:64–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12557 PMID: 24894853
56. Orom H, Homish D, Homish G, Underwood W. Quality of physician-patient relationships is associated with the influence of physician treatment recommendations among patients with prostate cancer who chose active surveillance. Urol Oncol: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2014; 32(4):396–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.09.018 PMID: 24332649
57. Volk R, McFall S, Cantor S, Byrd T, Le Y, Kuban D et al. ‘It’s not like you just had a heart attack’: decision-making about active surveillance by men with localized prostate cancer. Psycho-Oncology. 2014; 23(4):467–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3444 PMID: 24243777
58. Acar C, Schoffelmeer C, Tillier C, de Blok W, van Muilekom E, van der Poel H. QoL in Patients with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. A Comparative Retrospective Study: Brachytherapy Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Versus Active Surveillance. J Endourol. 2014; 28(1):117–124. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0349 PMID: 23978277
59. Berger Z, Yeh J, Carter H, Pollack C. Characteristics and Experiences of Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer Who Left an Active Surveillance Program. The Patient—Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. 2014; 7(4):427–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0066-z PMID: 24920082
60. Womble P, Montie J, Ye Z, Linsell S, Lane B, Miller D. Contemporary Use of Initial Active Surveillance Among Men in Michigan with Low-risk Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2014; 67(1):44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.024 PMID: 25159890
61. de Bekker-Grob E, Bliemer M, Donkers B, Essink-Bot M, Korfage I, Roobol M et al. Patients’ and urologists’ preferences for prostate cancer treatment: a discrete choice experiment. Br J Cancer. 2013; 109 (3):633–640. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.370 PMID: 23860533
62. Punnen S, Cowan J, Dunn L, Shumay D, Carroll P, Cooperberg M. A longitudinal study of anxiety, depression and distress as predictors of sexual and urinary QoL in men with prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013; 112(2):E67–E75. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12209 PMID: 23795800
63. Bellardita L, Rancati T, Alvisi M, Villani D, Magnani T, Marenghi C et al. Predictors of Health-related QoL and Adjustment to Prostate Cancer During Active Surveillance. Eur Urol. 2013; 64(1):30–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.009 PMID: 23357351
64. Mróz L, Oliffe J, Davison B. Masculinities and patient perspectives of communication about active surveillance for prostate cancer. Health Psychol. 2013; 32(1):83–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029934PMID: 23316856
65. Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P. Population Based Study of Use and Determinants of Active Surveillance and Watchful Waiting for Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer. The Journal of Urology. 2013; 190(5):1742–1749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.054 PMID: 23727309
66. Xu J, Victoria Neale A, Dailey R, Eggly S, Schwartz K. Patient Perspective on Watchful Waiting/Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer. Journal Am Board Fam Med. 2012; 25(6):763–770.
67. Seiler D, Randazzo M, Leupold U, Zeh N, Isbarn H, Chun F et al. Protocol-based Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: Anxiety Levels in Both Men and Their Partners. Urology. 2012; 80 (3):564–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.053 PMID: 22770614
68. Goh A, Kowalkowski M, Bailey D Jr, Kazer M, Knight S, Latini D. Perception of cancer and inconsistency in medical information are associated with decisional conflict: a pilot study of men with prostate cancer who undergo active surveillance. BJU Int. 2012; 110(2b):E50–E56.
69. Davison B, Breckon E. Factors influencing treatment decision making and information preferences of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Patient Educ Couns. 2012; 87(3):369–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.11.009 PMID: 22177658
70. Gorin M, Eldefrawy A, Ekwenna O, Soloway M. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: knowledge, acceptance and practice among urologists. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Dis. 2012; 15 (2):177–181.
71. Vasarainen H, Lokman U, Ruutu M, Taari K, Rannikko A. Prostate cancer active surveillance and health-related QoL: results of the Finnish arm of the prospective trial. BJU Int. 2012; 109(11):1614–1619. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10677.x PMID: 22044485
72. Sidana A, Hernandez D, Feng Z, Partin A, Trock B, Saha S et al. Treatment decision-making for localized prostate cancer: What younger men choose and why. The Prostate. 2012; 72(1):58–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.21406 PMID: 21520163
73. Kazer M, Bailey D, Sanda M, Colberg J, Kelly W. An Internet Intervention for Management of Uncertainty During Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2011; 38(5):561–568. https://doi.org/10.1188/11.ONF.561-568 PMID: 21875843
74. Kazer M, Bailey D, Colberg J, Kelly W, Carroll P. The needs for men undergoing active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer: results of a focus group study. J Clin Nurs. 2011; 20(3–4):581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03489.x PMID: 21219530
75. Xu J, Dailey R, Eggly S, Neale A, Schwartz K. Men’s Perspectives on Selecting Their Prostate Cancer. J Natl Med Assoc. 2011; 103(6):468–478. PMID: 21830629
76. Davison B, Goldenberg S. Patient acceptance of active surveillance as a treatment option for low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2011; 108(11):1787–1793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10200. x PMID: 21507187
77. Anandadas C, Clarke N, Davidson S, O’Reilly P, Logue J, Gilmore L et al. Early prostate cancer—which treatment do men prefer and why?. BJU Int. 2011; 107(11):1762–1768. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09833.x PMID: 21083643
78. Gorin M, Soloway C, Eldefrawy A, Soloway M. Factors That Influence Patient Enrollment in Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer. Urology. 2011; 77(3):588–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.10.039 PMID: 21215429
79. Ramsey S, Zeliadt S, Fedorenko C, Blough D, Moinpour C, Hall I et al. Patient preferences and urologist recommendations among local-stage prostate cancer patients who present for initial consultation and second opinions. World J Urol. 2011; 29(1):3–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-010-0602-yPMID: 20959991
80. Ervik B, Nordøy T, Asplund K. Hit by Waves-Living With Local Advanced or Localized Prostate Cancer Treated With Endocrine Therapy or Under Active Surveillance. Cancer Nurs. 2010; 33(5):382–389. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181d1c8ea PMID: 20562621
81. van den Bergh R, Essink-Bot M, Roobol M, Schröder F, Bangma C, Steyerberg E. Do Anxiety and Distress Increase During Active Surveillance for Low Risk Prostate Cancer?. The Journal of Urology. 2010; 183(5):1786–1791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.099 PMID: 20299064
82. van den Bergh R, van Vugt H, Korfage I, Steyerberg E, Roobol M, Schröder F et al. Disease insight and treatment perception of men on active surveillance for early prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2010; 105 (3):322–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08764.x PMID: 19594731
83. van den Bergh R, Essink-Bot M, Roobol M, Wolters T, Schröder F, Bangma C et al. Anxiety and distress during active surveillance for early prostate cancer. Cancer. 2009; 115(17):3868–3878. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24446 PMID: 19637245
84. Couper J, Love A, Dunai J, Duchesne G, Bloch S, Costello A et al. The psychological aftermath of prostate cancer treatment choices: a comparison of depression, anxiety and QoL outcomes over the 12 months following diagnosis. Med J Aust. 2009; 190:86–89.
85. Oliffe J, Davison B, Pickles T, Mroz L. The Self-Management of Uncertainty Among Men Undertaking Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. Qual Health Res. 2009; 19(4):432–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309332692 PMID: 19229061
86. Davison B, Oliffe J, Pickles T, Mroz L. Factors Influencing Men Undertaking Active Surveillance for the Management of Low-Risk Prostate Cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2009; 36(1):89–96. https://doi.org/10.1188/09.ONF.89-96 PMID: 19136342
87. Arredondo S, Downs T, Lubeck D, Pasta D, Silva S, Wallace K et al. Watchful Waiting and Health Related QoL for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer: Data From CaPSURE. The Journal of Urology. 2008; 179(5):S14–S18.
88. Isebaert S, Van Audenhove C, Haustermans K, Junius S, Joniau S, De Ridder K et al. Evaluating a Decision Aid for Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer in Clinical Practice. Urol Int. 2008; 81 (4):383–388. https://doi.org/10.1159/000167833 PMID: 19077396
89. Sommers B, Beard C, D’Amico A, Kaplan I, Richie J, Zeckhauser R. Predictors of patient preferences and treatment choices for localized prostate cancer. Cancer. 2008; 113(8):2058–2067. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23807 PMID: 18704993
90. Taussky D, Liu A, Abrahamowicz M, Léger-Bélanger E, Bahary J, Beauchemin M et al. Factors influencing treatment decisions in patients with low risk prostate cancer referred to a brachytherapy clinic. Can J Urol. 2008; 15(6):4415–4420. PMID: 19046495
91. Hegarty J, Wallace M, Comber H. Uncertainty and QoL Among Men Undergoing Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer in the United States and Ireland. Am J Mens Health. 2008; 2(2):133–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988307300467 PMID: 19477777
92. Burnet K, Parker C, Dearnaley D, Brewin C, Watson M. Does active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer carry psychological morbidity?. BJU Int. 2007; 100(3):540–543. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07009.x PMID: 17550414
93. Katz G, Rodriguez R. Changes in Continence and Health-Related QoL After Curative Treatment and Watchful Waiting of Prostate Cancer. Urology. 2007; 69(6):1157–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.02.003 PMID: 17572206
94. Clarke M, Wilson J, Kennedy K, MacDonagh R. Clinical Judgment Analysis of the Parameters Used by Consultant Urologists in the Management of Prostate Cancer. The Journal of Urology. 2007; 178 (1):98–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.029 PMID: 17499280
95. Bailey D, Wallace M, Mishel M. Watching, waiting and uncertainty in prostate cancer. J Clin Nurs. 2007; 16(4):734–741. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01545.x PMID: 17402955
96. Joseph H, Thibault G, Ruttle-King J. Perceived Stress and QoL among Prostate Cancer Survivors. Military Medicine. 2006; 171(5):425–429. PMID: 16761894
97. Kennedy F, Harcourt D, Rumsey N. Perceptions of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) among UK health professionals. Breast. 2009; 18(2):89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2009.01.004 PMID: 19231188
98. Partridge A, Winer JP, Golshan M, Bellon JR, Blood E, Dees EC, et al. Perceptions and management approaches of physicians who care for women with ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Breast Cancer. 2008; 8(3):275–80. https://doi.org/10.3816/CBC.2008.n.032 PMID: 18650159
99. Okediji PT, Salako O, Fatiregun OO. Pattern and predictors of unmet supportive care needs in cancer patients. Cureus. 2017; 9(5):e1234. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1234 PMID: 28620565
100. Duijts SF, van Egmond MP, Spelten E, van Muijen P, Anema JR, van der Beek AJ. Physical and psychosocial problems in cancer survivors beyond return to work: a systematic review. Psychooncology. 2014; 23(5):481–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3467 PMID: 24375630
101. Carlsen LE. Mindfulness-based interventions for coping with cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2016; 1373 (1):5–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13029 PMID: 26963792
102. Barnett M, McDonnell G, DeRosa A, Schuler T, Philip E, Peterson L, et al. Psychosocial outcomes and interventions among cancer survivors diagnosed during adolescence and young adulthood: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2016; 10(5):814–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-016-0527-6PMID: 26920873
103. Mader EM, Li HH, Lyons KD, Morley CP, Formica MK, Perrapato SD, et al. Qualitative insights into how men with low-risk prostate cancer choosing active surveillance negotiate stress and uncertainty. BMC Urology. 2017; 17:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-017-0225-3 PMID: 28482875
104. Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L, Wallis M, Bartlett JM, Brookes C, et al. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial. Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51(16):2296–2303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.07.017 PMID: 26296293
105. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, van Leeuwen-Stok AE, Skinner VP, Dif N, et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ–the LORD study. Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51(12):1497–1510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.05.008 PMID: 26025767