Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 2/2018

01-06-2018 | Review Article

A standardized analysis of the current surgical and non-surgical treatment selection process for men with localized prostate cancer

Authors: Wenjie Zhong, Kayvan Haghighi, Prem Rathore, Eddy Wong, Pascal Mancuso

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to treat localized prostate cancer has increased in popularity, although other options exist, including radiotherapy and active surveillance. The decision about choosing the right treatment has become pertinent for many patients. This literature review aimed to assess the current state-of-the-art regarding decisional aids and the associated decisional outcomes for the purpose of designing a method for both patients and doctors to use to make the best treatment decision for the patient. A literature search was conducted via MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases using the keywords “prostate” and “cancer” and “impact” and “decisio*” and “treatment.” Articles were included that focused on treatment outcomes, decision-making processes, and the use of decisional aids for localized prostate cancer. Articles that investigated prostate cancer in general or prostate cancer screening were excluded, as were articles that were not written in English. Altogether, 13 articles were finally critically reviewed for this study. Results were conflicting regarding the relations between patient factors, use of decisional aids, and decisional outcomes. There was a large gap in the literature regarding the optimal decision-making process for men with localized prostate cancer. The role of currently available decisional aids is limited to helping patients make the right decisions. There is a need to develop a novel decisional aid in which patient–physician discussion—involving evaluation of a spectrum of patient-, doctor-, and treatment-related factors—is included.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C et al (2012) Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol 187:2087CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C et al (2012) Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol 187:2087CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W et al (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55:1037CrossRefPubMed Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W et al (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55:1037CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Allan C, Ilic D (2016) Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Urol Int 96:373–378CrossRefPubMed Allan C, Ilic D (2016) Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Urol Int 96:373–378CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Yaxley JW, Coughlin GD, Chambers SK et al (2016) Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet 388:1057–1066CrossRefPubMed Yaxley JW, Coughlin GD, Chambers SK et al (2016) Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy: early outcomes from a randomised controlled phase 3 study. Lancet 388:1057–1066CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1415–1424CrossRefPubMed Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1415–1424CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA et al (2016) Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1425–1437CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA et al (2016) Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1425–1437CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Wallis CJD, Saskin R, Choo R et al (2016) Surgery versus radiotherapy for clinically-localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 70:21–30CrossRefPubMed Wallis CJD, Saskin R, Choo R et al (2016) Surgery versus radiotherapy for clinically-localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 70:21–30CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Tong C (2011) Information that affects patients’ treatment choices for early stage prostate cancer: a review. Can J Urol 18:5998–6006PubMed Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Tong C (2011) Information that affects patients’ treatment choices for early stage prostate cancer: a review. Can J Urol 18:5998–6006PubMed
11.
go back to reference Zeliadt SB, Ramsey SD, Penson DF et al (2006) Why do men choose one treatment over another? A review of patient decision making for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 106:1865–1874CrossRefPubMed Zeliadt SB, Ramsey SD, Penson DF et al (2006) Why do men choose one treatment over another? A review of patient decision making for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 106:1865–1874CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Orom H, Biddle C, Underwood W III, Nelson C, Homish L (2016) What is a ‘‘good’’ treatment decision? decisional control, knowledge, treatment decision making, and quality of life in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Med Decis Making 36:714–725CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Orom H, Biddle C, Underwood W III, Nelson C, Homish L (2016) What is a ‘‘good’’ treatment decision? decisional control, knowledge, treatment decision making, and quality of life in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Med Decis Making 36:714–725CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Violette P, Agoritsas T, Alexander P et al (2015) Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin 65:239–251CrossRefPubMed Violette P, Agoritsas T, Alexander P et al (2015) Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin 65:239–251CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Berry DL, Halpenny B, Hong F et al (2013) The personal patient profile-prostate decision support for men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-center randomized trial. Urol Oncol 31:1012–1021CrossRefPubMed Berry DL, Halpenny B, Hong F et al (2013) The personal patient profile-prostate decision support for men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-center randomized trial. Urol Oncol 31:1012–1021CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference van Tol-Geerdink JJ, Willem Leer J, Weijerman PC et al (2013) Choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy when men are eligible for both: a randomized controlled trial of usual care vs decision aid. BJU Int 111:564–573CrossRefPubMed van Tol-Geerdink JJ, Willem Leer J, Weijerman PC et al (2013) Choice between prostatectomy and radiotherapy when men are eligible for both: a randomized controlled trial of usual care vs decision aid. BJU Int 111:564–573CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Blumenthal-Barby JS, Cantor SB, Russell HV, Naik AD, Volk RJ (2013) Decision aids: when ‘nudging’ patients to make a particular choice is more ethical than balanced, nondirective content. Health Aff 32:303–310CrossRef Blumenthal-Barby JS, Cantor SB, Russell HV, Naik AD, Volk RJ (2013) Decision aids: when ‘nudging’ patients to make a particular choice is more ethical than balanced, nondirective content. Health Aff 32:303–310CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Chu WG, Kim BJ, Slezak J et al (2015) The effect of urologist experience on choosing active surveillance for prostate cancer. World J Urol 33:1701–1706CrossRefPubMed Chu WG, Kim BJ, Slezak J et al (2015) The effect of urologist experience on choosing active surveillance for prostate cancer. World J Urol 33:1701–1706CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Hacking B, Wallace L, Scott S, Kosmala-Anderson J, Belkora J, McNeill A (2013) Testing the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a “decision navigation” intervention for early stage prostate cancer patients in Scotland—a randomized controlled trial. Psychooncology 22:1017–1024CrossRef Hacking B, Wallace L, Scott S, Kosmala-Anderson J, Belkora J, McNeill A (2013) Testing the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a “decision navigation” intervention for early stage prostate cancer patients in Scotland—a randomized controlled trial. Psychooncology 22:1017–1024CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Marcus AC, Diefenbach MA, Stanton AL, et al (2013) Cancer patient and survivor research from the Cancer Information Service Research Consortium: a preview of three large randomized trials and initial lessons learned. J Health Commun 18:543–562CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Marcus AC, Diefenbach MA, Stanton AL, et al (2013) Cancer patient and survivor research from the Cancer Information Service Research Consortium: a preview of three large randomized trials and initial lessons learned. J Health Commun 18:543–562CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Chambers SK, Ferguson M, Gardiner RA, Aitken J, Occhipinti S (2013) Intervening to improve psychological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 22:1025–1034CrossRefPubMed Chambers SK, Ferguson M, Gardiner RA, Aitken J, Occhipinti S (2013) Intervening to improve psychological outcomes for men with prostate cancer. Psychooncology. 22:1025–1034CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Diefenbach MA, Mohamed NE, Butz BP, et al (2012) Acceptability and preliminary feasibility of an internet/CDROM-based education and decision program for early-stage prostate cancer patients: randomized pilot study [serial online]. J Med Internet Res 14:e6CrossRef Diefenbach MA, Mohamed NE, Butz BP, et al (2012) Acceptability and preliminary feasibility of an internet/CDROM-based education and decision program for early-stage prostate cancer patients: randomized pilot study [serial online]. J Med Internet Res 14:e6CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Feldman-Stewart D, Tong C, Siemens R, et al (2012) The impact of explicit values clarification exercises in a patient decision aid emerges after the decision is actually made: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Med Decis Making 32:616–626CrossRefPubMed Feldman-Stewart D, Tong C, Siemens R, et al (2012) The impact of explicit values clarification exercises in a patient decision aid emerges after the decision is actually made: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. Med Decis Making 32:616–626CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Taylor KL, Davis KM, Lamond T, et al (2010) Use and evaluation of a CD-ROMbased decision aid for prostate cancer treatment decisions. Behav Med. 36:130–140CrossRefPubMed Taylor KL, Davis KM, Lamond T, et al (2010) Use and evaluation of a CD-ROMbased decision aid for prostate cancer treatment decisions. Behav Med. 36:130–140CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Davison BJ, Goldenberg SL, Wiens KP, Gleave ME (2007) Comparing a generic and individualized information decision support intervention for men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer [serial online]. Cancer Nurs 30:E7–E15CrossRefPubMed Davison BJ, Goldenberg SL, Wiens KP, Gleave ME (2007) Comparing a generic and individualized information decision support intervention for men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer [serial online]. Cancer Nurs 30:E7–E15CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Mishel MH, Germino BB, Lin L, et al (2009) Managing uncertainty about treatment decision making in early stage prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Patient EducCouns 77:349–359 Mishel MH, Germino BB, Lin L, et al (2009) Managing uncertainty about treatment decision making in early stage prostate cancer: a randomized clinical trial. Patient EducCouns 77:349–359
Metadata
Title
A standardized analysis of the current surgical and non-surgical treatment selection process for men with localized prostate cancer
Authors
Wenjie Zhong
Kayvan Haghighi
Prem Rathore
Eddy Wong
Pascal Mancuso
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-018-0796-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Journal of Robotic Surgery 2/2018 Go to the issue