A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study. | LitMetric

Objectives: In a prospective, comparative effectiveness study, we assessed clinical and psychological factors associated with switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT) among low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

Methods: Using ultra-rapid case identification, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews ( = 1139) with low-risk patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason≤6) and follow-up interviews 6-10 months post-diagnosis ( = 1057). Among men remaining on AS for at least 12 months ( = 601), we compared those who continued on AS ( = 515) versus men who underwent delayed AT ( = 86) between 13 and 24 months, using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results: Delayed AT was predicted by time dependent PSA levels (≥10 vs. <10; HR = 5.6, 95% CI 2.4-13.1) and Gleason scores (≥7 vs. ≤6; adjusted HR = 20.2, 95% CI 12.2-33.4). Further, delayed AT was more likely among men whose urologist initially recommended AT (HR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.07-4.22), for whom tumour removal was very important (HR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.35-3.52), and who reported greater worry about not detecting disease progression early (HR = 1.67, 1.05-2.65). In exploratory analyses, 31% (27/86) switched to AT without evidence of progression, while 4.7% (24/515) remained on AS with evidence of progression.

Conclusions: After adjusting for clinical evidence of disease progression over the first year post-diagnosis, we found that urologists' initial treatment recommendation and patients' early treatment preferences and concerns about AS each independently predicted undergoing delayed AT during the second year post-diagnosis. These findings, along with almost one-half undergoing delayed AT without evidence of progression, suggest the need for greater decision support to remain on AS when it is clinically indicated.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9045562PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bco2.124DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

active treatment
8
active surveillance
8
low-risk prostate
8
prostate cancer
8
psychological predictors
4
predictors delayed
4
active
4
delayed active
4
treatment active
4
surveillance low-risk
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!