Patients' Preferences for Androgen Deprivation Therapy in the Treatment of Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.

IF 1.9 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES MDM Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683221137752
Brian De, Lisa M Lowenstein, Kelsey L Corrigan, Lauren M Andring, Deborah A Kuban, Scott B Cantor, Robert J Volk, Karen E Hoffman
{"title":"Patients' Preferences for Androgen Deprivation Therapy in the Treatment of Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer.","authors":"Brian De,&nbsp;Lisa M Lowenstein,&nbsp;Kelsey L Corrigan,&nbsp;Lauren M Andring,&nbsp;Deborah A Kuban,&nbsp;Scott B Cantor,&nbsp;Robert J Volk,&nbsp;Karen E Hoffman","doi":"10.1177/23814683221137752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> For men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC), adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has shown efficacy, but men are often reluctant to accept it because of its impact on quality of life. <b>Methods.</b> We conducted time tradeoffs (score of 1 = perfect health and 0 = death) and probability tradeoffs with patients aged 51 to 78 y who had received EBRT for IRPC within the past 2 y. Of 40 patients, 20 had received 6 mo of ADT and 20 had declined. Utility assessments explored 4 ADT-related side effects: hot flashes, fatigue, loss of libido/erectile dysfunction, and weight gain. <b>Results.</b> The most commonly reported \"worst\" treatment-related complication of ADT was fatigue (50% in both cohorts) followed by reduced libido/erectile dysfunction (40% in both cohorts). The utilities for fatigue were mean = 0.71 and median = 0.92 and for reduced libido/erectile dysfunction were mean = 0.81 and median = 0.92. Utilities did not differ significantly between cohorts. Assuming a 6-mo course of ADT, men reported being willing to trade 3 mo of life expectancy to avoid fatigue due to ADT and 1.8 mo to avoid sexual side effects. Patients in the ADT cohort were willing to accept the side effects of ADT in exchange for a mean 8% absolute increase in survival, whereas patients in the no ADT cohort required a 16% increase (<i>P</i> < 0.001). <b>Conclusions.</b> When considering treatment with ADT, men with IRPC identified fatigue and sexual dysfunction as the most bothersome side effects. Patients who declined ADT expected a larger survival benefit than those who opted for treatment. Both groups expected a survival benefit exceeding that shown by recent trials, suggesting some men may be selecting treatments inconsistent with their preferences.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>This study demonstrates that prostate cancer patients receiving radiation therapy are reluctant to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) most commonly due to anticipated fatigue and loss of libido/erectile dysfunction.Men who had received ADT reported they would require an average 8% absolute increase in survival to tolerate its side effects, whereas those who declined ADT would require an average 16% increase.Required thresholds are well above the estimated absolute survival benefit for ADT demonstrated in recent clinical trials, suggesting an unmet need for improved patient education regarding the risks and benefits of ADT.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"7 2","pages":"23814683221137752"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/82/0d/10.1177_23814683221137752.PMC9669695.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683221137752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. For men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC), adding short-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has shown efficacy, but men are often reluctant to accept it because of its impact on quality of life. Methods. We conducted time tradeoffs (score of 1 = perfect health and 0 = death) and probability tradeoffs with patients aged 51 to 78 y who had received EBRT for IRPC within the past 2 y. Of 40 patients, 20 had received 6 mo of ADT and 20 had declined. Utility assessments explored 4 ADT-related side effects: hot flashes, fatigue, loss of libido/erectile dysfunction, and weight gain. Results. The most commonly reported "worst" treatment-related complication of ADT was fatigue (50% in both cohorts) followed by reduced libido/erectile dysfunction (40% in both cohorts). The utilities for fatigue were mean = 0.71 and median = 0.92 and for reduced libido/erectile dysfunction were mean = 0.81 and median = 0.92. Utilities did not differ significantly between cohorts. Assuming a 6-mo course of ADT, men reported being willing to trade 3 mo of life expectancy to avoid fatigue due to ADT and 1.8 mo to avoid sexual side effects. Patients in the ADT cohort were willing to accept the side effects of ADT in exchange for a mean 8% absolute increase in survival, whereas patients in the no ADT cohort required a 16% increase (P < 0.001). Conclusions. When considering treatment with ADT, men with IRPC identified fatigue and sexual dysfunction as the most bothersome side effects. Patients who declined ADT expected a larger survival benefit than those who opted for treatment. Both groups expected a survival benefit exceeding that shown by recent trials, suggesting some men may be selecting treatments inconsistent with their preferences.

Highlights: This study demonstrates that prostate cancer patients receiving radiation therapy are reluctant to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) most commonly due to anticipated fatigue and loss of libido/erectile dysfunction.Men who had received ADT reported they would require an average 8% absolute increase in survival to tolerate its side effects, whereas those who declined ADT would require an average 16% increase.Required thresholds are well above the estimated absolute survival benefit for ADT demonstrated in recent clinical trials, suggesting an unmet need for improved patient education regarding the risks and benefits of ADT.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
中危前列腺癌患者对雄激素剥夺疗法的偏好
背景。对于中危险前列腺癌(IRPC)的男性,在外部放射治疗(EBRT)的基础上增加短期雄激素剥夺治疗(ADT)已显示出疗效,但由于其对生活质量的影响,男性往往不愿接受。方法。我们对在过去2年内接受过EBRT治疗的51 - 78岁的IRPC患者进行了时间权衡(得分为1 =完全健康,0 =死亡)和概率权衡。在40名患者中,20名患者接受了6个月的ADT治疗,20名患者的ADT治疗有所下降。效用评估探讨了4种与adt相关的副作用:潮热、疲劳、性欲减退/勃起功能障碍和体重增加。结果。最常见的ADT治疗相关并发症是疲劳(两组均为50%),其次是性欲下降/勃起功能障碍(两组均为40%)。疲劳的效用平均值为0.71,中位数为0.92,性欲减退/勃起功能障碍的效用平均值为0.81,中位数为0.92。群组之间的效用没有显著差异。假设ADT疗程为6个月,男性报告愿意用3个月的预期寿命来避免ADT引起的疲劳,1.8个月的预期寿命来避免性副作用。ADT组的患者愿意接受ADT的副作用,以换取平均8%的绝对生存增加,而无ADT组的患者需要16%的绝对生存增加(P结论。当考虑用ADT治疗时,患有IRPC的男性认为疲劳和性功能障碍是最令人烦恼的副作用。拒绝ADT治疗的患者预期比选择治疗的患者有更大的生存获益。这两组人都期望生存效益超过最近的试验结果,这表明一些男性可能选择了与他们的偏好不一致的治疗方法。本研究表明,接受放射治疗的前列腺癌患者不愿接受雄激素剥夺治疗(ADT),最常见的原因是预期的疲劳和性欲丧失/勃起功能障碍。接受ADT治疗的男性报告说,他们需要平均增加8%的绝对生存期才能忍受其副作用,而那些拒绝接受ADT治疗的男性平均需要增加16%的绝对生存期。在最近的临床试验中,所需的阈值远远高于ADT的估计绝对生存益处,这表明对ADT风险和益处的改进患者教育的需求尚未得到满足。
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
MDM Policy and Practice
MDM Policy and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Prioritizing Patients from the Most Deprived Areas on Elective Waiting Lists in the NHS in England: Estimating the Health and Health Inequality Impact. Optimizing Masks and Random Screening Test Usage within K-12 Schools. Associations of Concordant and Shared Lung Cancer Screening Decision Making with Decisional Conflict: A Multi-Institution Cross-Sectional Analysis. Implications of Diminishing Lifespan Marginal Utility for Valuing Equity in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Evaluation of the Soda Tax on Obesity and Diabetes in California: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
×
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