Skip to main content

Health-Related Quality-of-Life Assessments in Patients with Advanced Cancer of the Prostate

PharmacoEconomics volume 21, pages 241–247 (2003)Cite this article

Abstract

Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) research, in general, is developing. It is becoming increasingly recognised as being important and knowledge on how to assess HR-QOL is spreading. Modern HR-QOL research should assess prevalence and severity of symptoms or functions, as well as the bother that symptoms or changes in functions inflict and whether this bother affects the overall well-being of the patient. In the prostate cancer field, HR-QOL assessments have evolved rapidly during the last decade. The importance of HR-QOL and associated research in prostate cancer is being more and more appreciated. Most published studies concern patients with early prostate cancer; studies in patients with late advanced stages are less frequent. In early stages, patients often have no or few symptoms from the disease. HR-QOL aspects for these patients are thus often associated with anxiety and treatment adverse effects such as changes in sexual, urinary and bowel functions. Changes in these functions also often affect HR-QOL in patients with more advanced local stages of prostate cancer or metastatic disease. Moreover, HR-QOL in these patients is also affected by endocrine treatment aiming to castrate the patient. Monotherapy with antiandrogens as endocrine treatment may be the treatment alternative that affects HR-QOL the least. This alternative may, however, not be as effective as castration. In the palliative phase, patients with prostate cancer have problems common to patients dying of other cancers.

HR-QOL research should be encouraged and the knowledge on how HR-QOL can be assessed needs to be disseminated. HR-QOL assessments should be as natural in outcomes research as survival assessments. The technology of assessing HR-QOL needs to be further investigated and improved particularly with respect to the understanding of differences in performance between instruments using summary scores and item-specific assessments. Also, we need an increased understanding of the mechanisms behind patients’ trade-offs and of how information should be communicated to patients in order to give the best possibilities for making informed treatment decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

49,54 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Table I

References

  1. Schellhammer P, Cockett A, Boccon-Gibod L, et al. Assessment of endpoints for clinical trials for localized prostate cancer. Urology 1997; 49 (Suppl. 4A): 27–38

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Helgason AR, Adolfsson J, Dickman P, et al. Waning sexual function: the most important disease specific distress for patients with prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 1996; 73: 1417–21

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennet CL, Chapman G, Elstein AS, et al. A comparison of perspectives on prostate cancer: analysis of utility assessment of patients and physicians. Eur Urol 1997; 32 Suppl. 3: 86–8

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fosså SD, Waehre H, Kurth K-H, et al. Influence of urological morbidity on quality of life in patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 1997; 31 Suppl. 3: 3–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Litwin MS, Lubeck DP, Henning JM, et al. Differences in urologist and patients assessment of health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer: results of the CAPSURE data base. J Urol 1998; 159: 1988–92

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, et al. SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Boston (MA): The Health Institute of New England Medical Centre, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  7. Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, O’Leary MP, et al. The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1992; 148: 1549–57

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Steineck G, Bergmark K, Henningsohn L, et al. Symptom documentation in cancer survivors as a basis for therapy modifications. Acta Oncologica 2002; 41: 244–52

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chapman GB, Elstein AS, Kuzel T, et al. A multi-attributable model of prostate cancer patient’s preferences for health related quality of life. Qual Life Res 1999; 83: 1231–45

    Google Scholar 

  10. Singer PA, Tasch ES, Stocking C, et al. Sex or survival: trade-off between quality and quantity of life. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 328–34

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Brundage MD, Davidson JR, Mackillop WJ. Trading treatment toxicity for survival in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 330–40

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Helgason AR, Adolfsson J, Dickman P, et al. Sexual desire, erection, orgasm and ejaculatory functions and their importance to elderly Swedish men: a population-based study. Age Ageing 1996; 25: 285–91

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mazur DJ, Merz JF. Older patients’ willingness to trade off urologic adverse events for a longer survival in the clinical setting of prostate cancer. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995; 43: 979–84

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Helgason AR, Dickman PW, Adolfsson J, et al. Emotional isolation: prevalence and the effect on well-being among 50–80-year-old prostate cancer patients. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2001; 35: 97–101

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Litwin MS, Hays RD, Fink A, et al. Quality of life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1995; 273: 129–35

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Schapira MM, Lawrence WF, Katz DA, et al. Effect of treatment on quality of life among men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Med Care 2001; 39: 243–53

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Huggins C, Hodges CV. Studies on prostate cancer: I. the effect of castration, of estrogen and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. Cancer Res 1941; 1: 293–7

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Huggins C, Stevens RE, Hodges CV. Studies on prostate cancer: II. the effects of castration on advanced carcinoma of the prostate gland. Arch Surg 1941; 43: 209–23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Schröder FH. Endocrine treatment: expected duration stage by stage. Prostate Suppl 2000; 10: 26–31

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hedlund P-O. Side effects of endocrine treatment and their mechanisms: castration, antriandrogen and estrogens. Prostate Suppl 2000; 10: 32–7

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lund BC, Bever-Stille KA, Perry PJ. Testosterone and andropause: the feasibility of testosterone replacement therapy in elderly men. Pharmacotherapy 1999; 19: 951–6

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wei JT, Gross M, Jaffe CA, et al. Antiandrogen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer results in significant loss of bone density. Urology 1999; 54: 607–11

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Daniell HW. Osteoporosis after orchiectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1997; 157: 439–44

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Daniell HW, Dunn SR, Ferguson DW, et al. Progressive osteoporosis during androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J Urol 2000; 163: 181–6

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hatano T, Oishi Y, Furuta A, et al. Incidence of bone fracture in patients receiving luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agents for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2000; 86: 449–52

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Carlstöm K, Stege R, Henriksson P, et al. Possible bone-preserving capacity of high-dose intramuscular depot estrogen as compared to orchiectomy in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer. Prostate 1997; 46: 193–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosenblatt D, Mellow A. Depression during hormonal treatment of prostate cancer. J Am Board Fam Pract 1995; 8: 317–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cliff AM, MacDonagh RP. Psychological morbidity in prostate cancer: II. a comparison of patients and partners. BJU Int 2000; 86: 834–9

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Chodak G, Roololloh S, Kasmis B, et al. Single-agent therapy with bicalutamide: a comparison with medical or surgical castration in the treatment of advanced prostate carcinoma. Urology 1995; 46: 849–55

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Seidenfeld J, Samson DJ, Hasselblad V, et al. Single-therapy androgen suppression in men with advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132: 566–77

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Herr HW. Quality of life in prostate cancer patients. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 207–17

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cassileth BR, Soloway MS, Vogelzang NJ, et al. Quality of life and psychological status in stage D prostate cancer. Zoladex Prostate Cancer Study Group. Qual Life Res 1992; 1: 323–9

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Tyrrell CJ, Kaisary AV, Iversen P, et al. A randomized comparison of “Casodex” (bicalutamide) 150mg in the treatment of metastatic and locally advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol 1998; 33: 447–56

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosendahl I, Kiebert G, Curran D, et al. Quality-adjusted survival (Q-TWIST) analysis of EORTC trial 30853: comparing goserelin acetate and flutamide with bilateral orchiectomy in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Prostate 1999; 38: 100–9

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Moninpur CM, Savage MJ, Troxel A, et al. Quality of life in advanced prostate cancer: results of a randomized therapeutic trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1537–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Fosså SD, Slee PHT, Brausi M, et al. Prednisone has quality-of-life benefits over flutamide in the treatment of hormone-resistant prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 62–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dawson NA, Conaway M, Halabi S, et al. A randomized study comparing standard versus moderate high dose megestrol acetate for patients with advanced prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000; 88: 825–34

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tannock IF, Osoba D, Stockler MR, et al. Chemotherapy with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisone alone for symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer: a Canadian randomized trial with palliative end points. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1756–64

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. van Andel G, Kuth KH, Rietbroek RL, et al. Quality of life in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer treated with epirubicin or with epirubicin plus medroxy progesterone acetate: is it feasible. Eur Urol 2000; 38: 259–64

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Fosså SD, Curran D, Aaronson NK, et al. Quality of life of patients with newly diagnosed poor prognosis M1 prostate cancer undergoing orchiectomy without or with Mitomycin C. Eur Urol 2000; 37: 541–51

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This review was supported by the research funds of the Karolinska Institute. The author has lectured on topics related to this article in activities sponsored by AstraZeneca.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Center for Surgical Sciences, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

    Jan Adolfsson

Authors
  1. Jan Adolfsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adolfsson, J. Health-Related Quality-of-Life Assessments in Patients with Advanced Cancer of the Prostate. Pharmacoeconomics 21, 241–247 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200321040-00002

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200321040-00002

Keywords

  • Prostate Cancer
  • Flutamide
  • Metastatic Prostate Cancer
  • Early Prostate Cancer
  • Chemical Castration