Good quality of life after prostate cancer treatment

Good quality of life after prostate cancer treatment

This resulted in a survey of members of the Association of prostate cancer self-help eV (BPS) under the HAROW study. However, there are limitations in areas that affect the partnership.
With the HAROW study the care of patients with prostate cancer in the German-speaking area is extensively studied since 2008. This should be answered important, yet unresolved issues, especially for the treatment under everyday conditions (details see here in the magazine under " prostate cancer patients give their doctors high marks "). To find out how the men feel after the treatment, the participants in a sub-study of their health-related quality of life were interviewed. The first results are now available:

Approved were only members of the Association of prostate cancer self-help eV (BPS) because there were no data on men in self-help groups, and these are regarded as particularly critical.Of these, 504 participated in men whose initial treatment was behind at least one year. They answered each general questions (eg age, partnership, profession), questions about the treatment of prostate cancer (eg, at the beginning, type of primary and possibly secondary treatment, cure views) and more important for the assessment questions. In addition, they rated their quality of life in two standardized questionnaire on scales that ranged from 0 to 100: The first sheet (called EORTC-QLQ-C30) included questions to 6 functional areas (eg, physical function, social function, general health) and 9 consequences of disease ( such as fatigue, pain, financial problems), the second sheet (called PSM) Questions to 8 areas that are specifically related to the prostate (eg, erectile dysfunction , partner problems, mental stress).
The participants were 69 years old on average, and the great majority of pensioned (84%) and married (86%). For two thirds of first a radical prostatectomy was performed in 10% of hormone therapy, at 6% external irradiation and at 4% a combination of hormone therapy and radiation.In just over half (58%) the initial treatment was back 2-5 years and more than one third of all (39%) had no secondary treatment was still necessary.

The type of initial treatment influenced the overall quality of life only a little, in some areas, one of the treatment methods primarily affected, as expected something more: for example, were the social function after irradiation better than those after combination treatment, sexual problems for significantly less. The time interval for first-line played virtually no role in the self-assessment. In contrast, healed men held their quality of life better than not healed and still in treatment (better features and less discomfort). In comparison to healthy elderly prostate cancer patients rated their general functions and symptoms practically no worse, the characters with respect to the prostate entirely, in some cases significantly (erectile dysfunction, sexual difficulties, partner problems, hot flashes and psychological stress).

These results, the authors, are relatively good. Even better than that of members of self-help groups expecting, what it could be several reasons as the preferred participation of satisfied men. Although the initial treatment very often lagged already at least 2 years, it influences the quality of life and these seem to be significantly reduced mainly by the combination of radiation and hormone therapy. Also, for the lack of influence of the time interval for initial treatment, the authors found an explanation: While By the time could decrease the treatment-related restrictions, but the age-related increase. The general HRQOL was almost normal in the participants, but not the prostate-related (eg sexuality). Overall, the healing practice of the greatest impact on quality of life and seem therefore to the condition of the patient is most important.

Conclusion of the authors
Each of the different initial treatment affects quality of life in a special way. Because the survival in localized prostate cancer are specific as comparable, one should include the data on quality of life more in the decision on the form of therapy. Compared to healthy subjects restrictions found mainly in the areas of mental stress, sexuality and partnership. Therefore, it seems reasonable to the early involvement of the partner / partner with.