Educational benefits of Internet and computer-based programmes for prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Salonen ◽  
Anne M. Ryhänen ◽  
Helena Leino-Kilpi
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Educational Benefits ◽  
Computer Based

scholarly journals MO27-2 Risk factors for metastasis in prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. S315
Author(s):  
Billy Susanto ◽  
Griffin Geraldo ◽  
Jennifer Jesse Limanto ◽  
Andree Kurniawan
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients

Factors affecting health-related quality of life among prostate cancer patients: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1997-2010
Author(s):  
Sharon Odeo ◽  
Amsalu Degu
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sexual Function ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Functional Score ◽  
Incidence And Mortality

Introduction Prostate cancer is recognized as the leading cause of malignancy-related incidence and mortality in the male population. The treatment regimens have long-term effects detrimental to the patient's quality of life. Hence, this review was aimed to determine the overall HRQOL and its associated among prostate cancer patients. Methods The review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases searched were PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cumulative Index to the Nursing and Allied Literature (CINAHL), which provided articles that were critically examined, yielding 52 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Results Out of 52 studies, 30 studies reported poor overall HRQOL in various domains after prostate cancer treatment. Contrastingly, 15 studies reported good overall quality of life after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer. Nonetheless, seven studies showed that the absence of a significant change in the overall quality of life after treatment. According to the studies, older age, comorbidities, higher clinical stage, higher Gleason score, greater cancer severity, African American race, impaired mental health, neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and lower level of education were the major poor predictors of HRQOL among prostate cancer patients. Conclusion The overall HRQOL in prostate cancer patients was generally poor in various functional domains after treatment. Among the various domains, sexual function was the most grossly affected functional score by the treatment modalities of prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Does Gleason score of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence and oncological outcomes? Protocol for systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e034612
Author(s):  
Athul John ◽  
Michael O'Callaghan ◽  
Rick Catterwell ◽  
Luke A Selth
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Biochemical Recurrence ◽  
Surgical Margins ◽  
Secondary Treatment ◽  
Oncological Outcomes

IntroductionPositive surgical margins (PSM) in cancer patients are commonly associated with worse prognosis and a higher risk of secondary treatment. However, the relevance of this parameter in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial, given the inconsistencies in its ability to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) and oncological outcomes. Hence, further assessment of the utility of surgical margins for prostate cancer prognosis is required to predict these outcomes more accurately. Over the last decade, studies have used the Gleason score (GS) of positive margins to predict outcomes. Herein, the authors aim to conduct a systematic review investigating the role of GS of PSM after radical prostatectomy in predicting BCR and oncological outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will perform a search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and COCHRANE databases. The review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will screen titles and abstracts to select articles appropriate for full-text review. Studies discussing GS of PSM after RP will be included. Given the change in reporting of GS, only articles from 2005 to 2019 will be included. The quality of the studies chosen will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool for non-randomised and Cochrane risk of bias for randomised control studies. We will adopt the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation framework to comment on quality of cumulative evidence. The primary outcome measure will be time to BCR. Secondary outcome measures include secondary treatment, disease-specific survival, disease progression-free and overall mortality at follow-up period. We aim to perform a meta-analysis if the level of heterogeneity is acceptable (I2<50%).Ethics and disseminationThe review does not require ethics approval as it is a review of published literature. The findings of the review will be submitted for peer-reviewed publications and presented at scientific meetings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019131800.

USE OF PATIENT ASSESSED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE INSTRUMENTS IN PROSTATE CANCER RESEARCH: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 2002–15

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saku Torvinen ◽  
Susanne Bergius ◽  
Risto Roine ◽  
Leena Lodenius ◽  
Harri Sintonen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Valuation Method ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to identify and qualitatively describe, in a systematic literature review, published studies that collected prostate cancer patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) estimates by using validated, generic instruments.Methods: Systematic searches of the literature were made using the Medline, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and CINAHL electronic databases from 2002 to 2015.Results: The search identified 2,171 references, of which 237 were obtained for full-text assessment; thirty-three of these articles were deemed relevant and included in the systematic review. An indirect valuation method was used in 73 percent (n = 24) of the studies. The most commonly used HRQoL instrument with an indirect valuation method was the EuroQol (EQ-5D; n = 21), and the second most common was the 15D (n = 5). A direct valuation method was used in 48 percent (n = 16) of the studies. Of these, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was the most often used (n = 10), followed by the Time-Trade-Off (n = 6). HRQoL scores varied in localized and early stage disease between 0.63 and 0.91, and in advanced or metastatic disease stage between 0.50 and 0.87. There was also variance in the HRQoL instruments and study methods used, which explains the large variance in HRQoL scores between the various disease stages.Conclusions: Although utility and quality-adjusted life-years gained are considered important measures of effectiveness in health care, the number of studies in which utilities of prostate cancer patients have been estimated using generic HRQoL instruments, based on either direct or indirect measurement of HRQoL, is fairly small.

Interventions that may reduce depressive symptoms among prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 1686-1693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy A. Newby ◽  
Julie N. Graff ◽  
Linda K. Ganzini ◽  
Marian S. McDonagh
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Role of Hormonal Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients with Nonmetastatic Disease Recurrence After Local Curative Treatment: A Systematic Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 802-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roderick C.N. van den Bergh ◽  
Niels J. van Casteren ◽  
Thomas van den Broeck ◽  
Eve R. Fordyce ◽  
William K.M. Gietzmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Hormonal Treatment ◽  
Disease Recurrence ◽  
Curative Treatment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document