Decision making and prostate cancer treatment selection: a review

Religious Coping and Quality of Life Among Black and White Men With Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer is a significant impediment in men’s lives as this condition often exacerbates stress and reduces quality of life. Faith can be a resource through which men cope with health crises; however, few studies examine how religion or spirituality can have implications for racial disparities in health outcomes among men. The purpose of this study is to assess the associations between religious coping and quality of life among black and white men with prostate cancer. Data for this investigation were drawn from the Diagnosis and Decisions in Prostate Cancer Treatment Outcomes Study that consisted of 624 black and white men with complete information on the primary outcome and predictor variables. The primary outcome for this study was overall quality of life as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questionnaire. The main independent variable was religious coping measured by 2 subscales capturing positive and negative forms of coping. Black men in the study had lower overall quality of life scores (134.6 ± 19.6) than their white peers (139.8 ± 14.1). Black men in the sample also had higher average positive religious coping scores (12.9 ± 3.3) than white men (10.3 ± 4.5). Fully adjusted linear regression models of the total sample produced results indicating that positive religious coping was correlated with an increase in quality of life (β = .38, standard error [SE] = 0.18, P < .05). Negative religious coping was associated with a reduction in quality of life (β = −1.48, SE = 0.40, P < .001). Faith-oriented beliefs or perceptions can have implications for quality of life among men with prostate cancer. Sensitivity to the role of religion, spirituality, and faith should be seen by providers of health care as potential opportunities for improved outcomes in patients with prostate cancer and survivors.

High Levels of Medical Mistrust Are Associated With Low Quality of Life Among Black and White Men With Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Medical mistrust is thought to affect health care-based decisions and has been linked to poor health outcomes. The effects of medical mistrust among men with prostate cancer are unknown. Thus, the goal of the current study is to examine the association between medical mistrust and quality of life (QOL) among black and white men with prostate cancer.

METHODS

A total of 877 men (415 black, 462 white) with prostate cancer between the ages of 40 to 81 years who entered the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry during the years 2007 and 2008 were retrospectively recruited. The dependent variable was overall QOL measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questionnaire. The primary independent variable was medical mistrust. Multivariate regression analysis was used to assess the association between medical mistrust and overall QOL.

RESULTS

Compared with white men, black men reported a higher level of medical mistrust (black = 2.7, white = 2.4; P < .001) and lower QOL (black = 134.4, white = 139.5; P < 0.001). After controlling for demographical and clinical variables, higher levels of medical mistrust were associated with a reduction in overall QOL among men with prostate cancer (beta = -7.73; standard error = 1.54) CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of medical mistrust are associated with reduced overall QOL among black and white men with prostate cancer. Interventions targeted to reduce medical mistrust may be effective in increasing the overall QOL of men with prostate cancer.

Multidisciplinary Versus One-on-One Setting: A Qualitative Study of Clinicians' Perceptions of Their Relationship With Patients With Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Previous studies indicate that a multidisciplinary approach could be suitable for dealing with the complex issues faced by physicians in the management of prostate cancer; however, few studies have investigated clinicians' perceptions of multidisciplinary care. Our aim was to evaluate clinicians' perceptions of the patient-clinician relationship in a multidisciplinary context, and to compare this with physicians' perceptions of providing care independently.

METHODS

A qualitative observational study was performed in 2009. Three radiation oncologists, three urologists, three medical oncologists and one psychologist from the multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) team at the Prostate Program of Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy, were interviewed to assess their perceptions of their relationship with the patient.

RESULTS

Clinicians reported that the MDC has advantages regarding providing patients with more accurate information and acquiring information from patients, but a clear preference for a multidisciplinary setting did not emerge. Clinicians reported that in one-on-one examinations (1) they feel more comfortable listening to the patient and more able to manage communication, and that (2) the process of building trust is easier.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians appear to recognize the value of the MDC in terms of effective communication with patients but feel that other aspects of relationship building are hindered in a multidisciplinary setting. Organizational and teamwork issues need to be addressed to optimize the implementation of a multidisciplinary approach.

Social and clinical predictors of prostate cancer treatment decisions among men in South Carolina

OBJECTIVE

To assess social and clinical influences of prostate cancer treatment decisions among white and black men in the Midlands of South Carolina.

METHODS

We linked data collected on treatment decision making in men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1996 through 2002 with clinical and sociodemographic factors collected routinely by the South Carolina Central Cancer Registry (SCCCR). Unconditional logistic regression was used to assess social and clinical influences on treatment decision.

RESULTS

A total of 435 men were evaluated. Men of both races who chose surgery (versus radiation) were more likely to be influenced by their physician and by family/friends. Black men who chose surgery also were ~5 times more likely to make independent decisions (i.e., rather than be influenced by their doctor). White men who chose surgery were twice as likely to be influenced by the desire for cure and less likely to consider the side effects of impotence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18, 0.88) and incontinence (OR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.63); by contrast, there was a suggestion of an opposite effect in black men, whose decision regarding surgery tended to be more strongly influenced by these side effects.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that both clinical and social predictors play an important role for men in choosing a prostate cancer treatment, but these influences may differ by race.

Age differences in dual information-processing modes: implications for cancer decision making

Age differences in affective/experiential and deliberative processes have important theoretical implications for cancer decision making, as cancer is often a disease of older adulthood. The authors examined evidence for adult age differences in affective and deliberative information processes, reviewed the sparse evidence about age differences in decision making, and introduced how dual process theories and their findings might be applied to cancer decision making. Age-related declines in the efficiency of deliberative processes predict poorer-quality decisions as we age, particularly when decisions are unfamiliar and the information is numeric. However, age-related adaptive processes, including an increased focus on emotional goals and greater experience, can influence decision making and potentially offset age-related declines. A better understanding of the mechanisms that underlie cancer decision processes in our aging population should ultimately allow us to help older adults to better help themselves.

Choose Wisely: Therapeutic Decisions and Quality of Life in Patients With Prostate Cancer

A diagnosis of localized prostate cancer propels patients and their partners into the complex realm of decision making. The decision-making process and final choice of treatment affect quality of life (QOL). Physical, social, psychological, and spiritual aspects of QOL all can be impacted. Making a choice regarding cancer treatment is a high-risk decision. The decision-making process for localized prostate cancer is complicated further by a lack of scientific evidence that supports one treatment rather than another.

Why do men choose one treatment over another?: a review of patient decision making for localized prostate cancer

Treatment choices for localized prostate cancer appear to vary widely, although it is unclear whether this variation is a result of patient values or other factors. The authors conducted a systematic review of the literature, identifying 70 articles that focused on prostate cancer decision making. Studies suggest that men consider several issues when making treatment decisions. The authors found conflicting evidence regarding the importance that men place on cancer eradication, with considerable variation in how patients interpret evidence regarding treatment efficacy. The number of physicians that men see and the importance of the physician recommendation were found to vary considerably. Although men stated that side effects are important, few patients reported that side effect factors ultimately influenced their treatment choice. To the authors' knowledge, there is little research regarding how patients' personal values shape and influence their decision, or the role of race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status in preferences for treatment. The authors conclude that variations in treatment decisions may be more indicative of differences in the information patients receive rather than truly reflective of underlying patient preferences. Considerable progress is needed in helping patients fully understand how to balance the complex issues surrounding prostate cancer treatment decision making.

Racial treatment trends in localized/regional prostate carcinoma: 1992-1999

BACKGROUND

African-American men have a greater incidence of and mortality from prostate carcinoma compared with white men, and they are less likely to receive definitive therapy (radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy). During the 1990s, the use of brachytherapy increased; however, its influence on racial and ethnic prostate carcinoma treatment trends remains unclear. The objective of this study was to describe treatment trends over the period 1992-1999 for localized/regional prostate carcinoma among white, Hispanic, and African-American men.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry data from 1992 through 1999, logistic regression models were used to determine whether the odds of receiving a specific treatment modality differed by racial and ethnic group and whether the differences changed over time when the models were adjusted for age, marital status, tumor grade, and SEER site (geography).

RESULTS

The authors identified 142,340 men, including white men (81.6%), Hispanic men (6.4%), and African-American men (12.0%). Racial and ethnic differences in the rates of use of androgen-deprivation therapy/expectant management were noted; however, these differences appeared to lessen over time (P < 0.001). The rate of utilization of radical prostatectomy increased for Hispanic men, remained flat for African-American men, and decreased for white men. The utilization of brachytherapy and combination therapy increased for all three groups; however, the greatest increase in utilization was among white men.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research will be required to determine the patient-level and provider-level variables that influence racial and ethnic treatment differences in localized/regional prostate cancer.

A pilot study to determine support during the pre-treatment phase of early prostate cancer

While we know about physicians' involvement in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer, little is known about others who assist men in dealing with the diagnosis and treatment choices, once they are diagnosed with early prostate cancer, but not yet treated. This pilot study explores if men use other sources of support and the roles and functions of support providers. We conducted separate individual interviews with 21 men diagnosed with prostate cancer and 18 persons identified by the diagnosed men as their support provider. Some of the men diagnosed with prostate cancer reported not relying on a support provider, others identified other men already treated for prostate cancer, others' their partner. The provided support consisted of informational and emotional support. Men already treated for prostate cancer provided informational support. Spousal support depended on the diagnosed partner's willingness to accept emotional and/or informational support. Due to the variation in diagnosed men's support, we recommend that physicians inquire about patients' sources of and interest in support. This will reveal which patients rely almost exclusively on physicians, when deciding on a certain treatment.

Is there age bias in the treatment of localized prostate carcinoma?

BACKGROUND

Treatment recommendations for localized prostate carcinoma are based on the patient's remaining life expectancy (RLE), which is influenced by age, comorbidity, and tumor grade. Previous studies have evaluated the influence of age and comorbidity, but to the authors' knowledge not RLE, on actual treatment decisions.

METHODS

An age-stratified random sample of 347 patients was generated from a cohort of all patients with newly diagnosed prostate carcinoma in the Ontario Cancer Registry between May 1, 1995 and April 30, 1996 (n = 5192). Chart review was performed to obtain detailed tumor, comorbidity, and treatment information. RLE was estimated from a published model derived from a cohort of 451 men with untreated prostate carcinoma who were followed for 15 years. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate predictors of treatment, such as radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RT), or potentially curative therapy (RP or RT), in relation to patient age, comorbidity, tumor characteristics, and RLE.

RESULTS

RP was provided within 6 months of diagnosis to 58.7%, 32.1%, 2.6%, and 0% of patients of ages < 60 years, 60-69 years, 70-79 years, and 80+ years, respectively. The results for RT were 6.4%, 30.9%, 23.4%, and 3.3%, respectively. Increasing comorbidity decreased rates of RP but did not affect use of RT. After controlling for comorbidity and tumor characteristics, older men were found to be treated with RP less often than younger men with similar RLE, whereas RLE did not appear to influence receipt of RT.

CONCLUSIONS

Although different mechanisms may account for these results, an age bias may be present among urologists and radiation oncologists treating men with localized prostate carcinoma.

Provision of individualized information to men and their partners to facilitate treatment decision making in prostate cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To determine if providing individualized information to men who are newly diagnosed with prostate cancer and their partners would lower their levels of psychological distress and enable them to become more active participants in treatment decision making.

DESIGN

Quasiexperimental, one group, pretest/post-test.

SETTING

The Prostate Centre at Vancouver General Hospital in British Columbia, Canada.

SAMPLE

Convenience sample of 74 couples. 73 men had early-stage prostate cancer. Mean age of the men was 62.2 years, and mean age of the partners was 58.1 years. The majority (> 50%) had received their high school diplomas.

METHODS

Respondents completed measures of decision preferences and psychological distress at the time of diagnosis and four months later. All participants used a computer to identify their information and decision preferences. Computer-generated, graphic printouts were used to guide the information counseling session.

FINDINGS

Patients reported assuming a more active role in medical decision making than originally intended, partners assumed a more passive role in decision making than originally intended, and all participants had lower levels of psychological distress at four months.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the need to provide informational support to couples at the prostate cancer diagnosis to facilitate treatment decision making and lower levels of psychological distress. Future research is needed to evaluate this type of approach in the context of a randomized clinical trial design.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

The personalized, computer-graphic printouts can provide clinicians with an innovative method of guiding information counseling and providing decisional support to men with prostate cancer and their partners.