Personal preferences and discordant prostate cancer treatment choice in an intervention trial of men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer

16Citations
Citations of this article
145Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (LPC) can choose from multiple treatment regimens and are faced with a decision in which medical factors and personal preferences are important. The Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) is a computerized decision aid for men with LPC that focuses on personal preferences. We determined whether the P3P intervention improved the concordance of treatment choice with self-reported influential side-effects compared with a control group.Methods: English/Spanish-speaking men diagnosed with LPC (2007-2009) from four US cities were enrolled into a randomized trial and followed through 6-months via mailed or online questionnaire. Men were randomized to receive the P3P intervention or standard education plus links to reputable websites. We classified choice as concordant if men were concerned with (a) sexual function and chose external beam radiotherapy or brachytherapy, (b) bowel function and chose prostatectomy, (c) sex, bowel, and/or bladder function and chose active surveillance, or (d) not concerned with any side effect and chose any treatment. Using logistic regression, we calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between the P3P intervention and concordance.Results: Of 448 men, most were <65 years, non-Hispanic white, had multiple physician consultations prior to enrollment, and chose a treatment discordant with concerns about potential side effects. There was no significant difference in concordance between the intervention (45%) and control (50%) group (OR = 0.82; 95%CI = 0.56, 1.2).Conclusions: The P3P intervention did not improve concordance between potential side effects and treatment choice. Information and/or physician consultation immediately after diagnosis was likely to influence decisions despite concerns about side effects. The intervention may be more effective before the first treatment options consultation.Trial registration: NCT00692653 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00692653. © 2012 Bosco et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bosco, J. L. F., Halpenny, B., & Berry, D. L. (2012). Personal preferences and discordant prostate cancer treatment choice in an intervention trial of men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-123

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free