Patient preferences for life expectancy cutoffs for aggressive treatment in clinically localized prostate cancer.

John R Heard, John M Masterson, Michael Luu, Rebecca Gale, Brennan Spiegel, Stephen J Freedland, Timothy J Daskivich
{"title":"Patient preferences for life expectancy cutoffs for aggressive treatment in clinically localized prostate cancer.","authors":"John R Heard, John M Masterson, Michael Luu, Rebecca Gale, Brennan Spiegel, Stephen J Freedland, Timothy J Daskivich","doi":"10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.11.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Guidelines for prostate cancer treatment in men with limited life expectancy are based on expert opinion. Patient preferences for when to defer treatment based on longevity are unknown. We sought to define life expectancy thresholds at which men are more likely to choose conservative management in the context of varying risks of cancer death and treatment-related side effects.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We crowdsourced a conjoint analysis exercise to 2,046 men sociodemographically matched to a US prostate cancer population. Subjects were given a longevity estimate based on their age and comorbidity. They then chose between treatment and conservative management across scenarios with varying risks of cancer death at 5, 10, and 15 years, erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, and irritative urinary symptoms. Multivariable multinomial logistic regression identified the life expectancy threshold when men were more likely to choose conservative management over treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all men, there was a significant interaction between longevity and treatment choice (P < 0.001), with probability of treatment decreasing 15% for every 5-year decrease in life expectancy (OR0.85, 95% CI0.82-0.89). Across all tumor risk subtypes, men were significantly more likely to choose conservative management at life expectancy<10 years(OR<1, P < 0.05). For low-, favorable-intermediate-, unfavorable-intermediate-, and high-risk cancers, men were more likely to choose conservative management at life expectancy thresholds of ≤15, ≤10, ≤9, and ≤7 years, respectively (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preferences for when to consider conservative management of prostate cancer based on longevity align with current guidelines recommendations, except for low-risk disease, for which men are likely to consider conservative management at even higher life expectancy thresholds.</p>","PeriodicalId":23408,"journal":{"name":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.11.020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Guidelines for prostate cancer treatment in men with limited life expectancy are based on expert opinion. Patient preferences for when to defer treatment based on longevity are unknown. We sought to define life expectancy thresholds at which men are more likely to choose conservative management in the context of varying risks of cancer death and treatment-related side effects.

Materials and methods: We crowdsourced a conjoint analysis exercise to 2,046 men sociodemographically matched to a US prostate cancer population. Subjects were given a longevity estimate based on their age and comorbidity. They then chose between treatment and conservative management across scenarios with varying risks of cancer death at 5, 10, and 15 years, erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, and irritative urinary symptoms. Multivariable multinomial logistic regression identified the life expectancy threshold when men were more likely to choose conservative management over treatment.

Results: Across all men, there was a significant interaction between longevity and treatment choice (P < 0.001), with probability of treatment decreasing 15% for every 5-year decrease in life expectancy (OR0.85, 95% CI0.82-0.89). Across all tumor risk subtypes, men were significantly more likely to choose conservative management at life expectancy<10 years(OR<1, P < 0.05). For low-, favorable-intermediate-, unfavorable-intermediate-, and high-risk cancers, men were more likely to choose conservative management at life expectancy thresholds of ≤15, ≤10, ≤9, and ≤7 years, respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Preferences for when to consider conservative management of prostate cancer based on longevity align with current guidelines recommendations, except for low-risk disease, for which men are likely to consider conservative management at even higher life expectancy thresholds.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床局部前列腺癌患者对积极治疗预期寿命临界值的偏好。
背景:对于预期寿命有限的男性,前列腺癌治疗指南以专家意见为基础。患者对于何时根据寿命推迟治疗的偏好尚不清楚。我们试图确定在癌症死亡风险和治疗相关副作用不同的情况下,男性更有可能选择保守治疗的预期寿命阈值:我们对与美国前列腺癌患者群体在社会人口学上相匹配的 2046 名男性进行了联合分析。我们根据受试者的年龄和合并症估算了他们的寿命。然后,在 5 年、10 年和 15 年癌症死亡风险、勃起功能障碍、尿失禁和泌尿系统刺激性症状不同的情况下,受试者在治疗和保守治疗之间做出选择。多变量多项式逻辑回归确定了男性更有可能选择保守治疗而非治疗的预期寿命阈值:在所有男性中,寿命与治疗选择之间存在显著的交互作用(P < 0.001),预期寿命每减少 5 年,治疗概率就会降低 15%(OR0.85,95% CI0.82-0.89)。在所有肿瘤风险亚型中,男性在预期寿命时选择保守治疗的可能性明显更高:根据寿命确定何时考虑对前列腺癌进行保守治疗的偏好与当前指南的建议一致,但低风险疾病除外,男性可能会在预期寿命阈值更高时考虑保守治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
7.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations is the official journal of the Society of Urologic Oncology. The journal publishes practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science research articles which address any aspect of urologic oncology. Each issue comprises original research, news and topics, survey articles providing short commentaries on other important articles in the urologic oncology literature, and reviews including an in-depth Seminar examining a specific clinical dilemma. The journal periodically publishes supplement issues devoted to areas of current interest to the urologic oncology community. Articles published are of interest to researchers and the clinicians involved in the practice of urologic oncology including urologists, oncologists, and radiologists.
期刊最新文献
Is ipsilateral systematic biopsy combined with targeted biopsy the optimal substitute for bilateral systematic biopsy combined with targeted biopsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Risks of grade reclassification among patients with Gleason grade group 1 prostate cancer and PI-RADS 5 findings on prostate MRI. Impact of race and payor status on patterns of utilization of partial and radical nephrectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma in California. Defining the genetic profile of prostate cancer. Patient-reported functional outcomes and treatment-related regret in Hispanic and Spanish-speaking men following prostate cancer treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1