Reliable Pretreatment Information Assists Prostate Cancer Patients in Decision-Making

New York, NY, March 4, 2014 /3BL Media/ – Men who have been diagnosed with prostate cancer need to assimilate information rapidly in order to weigh the treatment options and make informed decisions. Although patients consult a variety of information sources, outcome information that is specific to the treating physician leads to greater patient satisfaction following treatment, according to a new study published in The Journal of Urology^®.

The benefits of patient information are broad. For many people confronted with a cancer diagnosis, information translates to greater involvement in management decisions, improved ability to cope, reduced anxiety and distress, better communication with family members, and increased satisfaction with treatment choices.

“The availability and quality of information are particularly relevant in prostate cancer, which affects a large number of men and is associated with significant treatment-related side effects. Despite its high prevalence, though, we know relatively little about the use and helpfulness of patient information materials among prostate cancer patients,” says lead investigator John T. Wei, MD, MS, of the Department of Urology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.

Researchers conducted a prospective, multicenter study on the use of information and satisfaction among a sample of men recently diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer undergoing definitive therapy. Over 1,200 men were enrolled in the PROST-QA (Prostate Cancer Outcomes and Satisfaction with Treatment Quality Assessment) study. Study participants completed several questionnaires before treatment and during follow-up through computer-assisted telephone interviews.

Although nearly 90% of the participants were Caucasian, 135 subjects of minority race also participated. Primary treatment included radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or brachytherapy, with or without androgen deprivation therapy.

Researchers found that information sources used by patients varied significantly according to race, education, and study site. The most commonly used source of information was physician description (93.2%), followed by print sources such as pamphlets and brochures (82.5%). The majority of men also used other sources, including websites (68%), family and friends (63.7%), and books on prostate cancer (59.1%). Other sources, such as video media, access to other men treated for prostate cancer, and summaries of physician-specific outcomes were used less often.

The use and helpfulness of different information sources varied by factors such as age, race, education level, income, and marital status. Differences in the use of sources were apparent among men of different backgrounds. In general, younger, non-black, married men with college educations and higher incomes used more sources of information. This was most apparent in the use of Internet-based sources, where there were significant differences among men of different socioeconomic and educational backgrounds. Significant differences were also seen in the use of books, family and friends, and access to other men with previous experience with prostate cancer treatments.

“These differences may be related to knowledge of and access to greater resources, although variation in information seeking behaviors and coping mechanisms among men of different demographic backgrounds cannot be discounted,” observes Wei.

“For prostate cancer patients, the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life is an important consideration. Reliable pretreatment information may allow patients to set expectations regarding treatment outcomes and make informed decisions in selecting therapy. Our results indicate that outcome information specific to the treating physician is associated with greater patient satisfaction following treatment, and that this type of information may assist patients in the decision making process,” he concludes.

#  #  #

Notes for editors
“Satisfaction with Information Used to Choose Prostate Cancer Treatment,” by Scott M Gilbert, Martin G Sanda, Rodney L Dunn, Thomas K Greenfield, Larry Hembroff, Eric Klein, Christopher S Saigal, Louis Pisters, Jeff Michalski, Howard M Sandler, Mark S Litwin, and John T. Wei. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.008. The Journal of Urology, Volume 191, Issue 5 (May 2014) published online in advance of issue by Elsevier.

About the authors
Scott M. Gilbert, MD, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Martin G. Sanda, MD, Department of Urology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Rodney L. Dunn, MS, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Thomas K. Greenfield, PhD, Department of Psychiatry and Public Health Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
Larry Hembroff, PhD, Institute for Public Policy & Social Research, Michigan State University, Lansing, MI
Eric Klein, MD, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
Christopher S. Saigal, MD, Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Louis Pisters, MD, Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX
Jeff Michalski, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
Howard M. Sandler, MD, MS, Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA
Mark S. Litwin, MD, MPH, Department of Urology and Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
John T. Wei, MD, MS, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

Full text of the article is available to credentialed journalists upon request; contact Linda Gruner at 212-633-3923 or jumedia@elsevier.com to obtain copies. To schedule an interview with the authors contact John Wei, MD, at +1 734 615 3040 or jtwei@med.umich.edu or Scott Gilbert, MD, at +1 352 226 0799 or Scott.Gilbert@urology.ufl.edu (after April 1: scott.gilbert@moffitt.org).

About The Journal of Urology®
Established in 1917, The Journal of Urology (www.jurology.com) is the official journal of the American Urological Association (www.auanet.org). It is the most widely read and highly cited journal in the field. It brings to its readership all the clinically relevant information needed to stay at the forefront of this dynamic field. This top-ranking journal presents investigative studies on critical areas of research and practice, survey articles providing short condensations of the best and most important urology literature worldwide and practice-oriented reports on interesting clinical observations.

About Elsevier
Elsevier is a world-leading provider of scientific, technical and medical information products and services. The company works in partnership with the global science and health communities to publish more than 2,000 journals, including The Lancet and Cell, and 25,000 book titles, including major reference works from Mosby and Saunders. Elsevier’s online solutions include ScienceDirect, Scopus, SciVal, Reaxys, ClinicalKey and Mosby’s Suite, which enhance the productivity of science and health professionals, helping research and health care institutions deliver better outcomes more cost-effectively.

A global business headquartered in Amsterdam, Elsevier employs 7,000 people worldwide. The company is part of Reed Elsevier Group PLC, a world leading provider of professional information solutions in the Science, Medical, Legal and Risk and Business sectors, which is jointly owned by Reed Elsevier PLC and Reed Elsevier NV. The ticker symbols are REN (Euronext Amsterdam), REL (London Stock Exchange), RUK and ENL (New York Stock Exchange).

Media contact
Linda Gruner
Elsevier
+1 212 633 3923
jumedia@elsevier.com