Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2019

01-02-2019 | Urologic Oncology

Perceptions of Barriers Towards Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From a National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists

Authors: Simon P. Kim, Cary P. Gross, Nilay D. Shah, Jon. C. Tilburt, Badrinath Konety, Stephen B. Williams, Christopher J. Weight, James B. Yu, Aryavarta M. S. Kumar, Neal J. Meropol

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The reasons for low clinical adoption of active surveillance (AS) for low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remain poorly understood. Thus, we conducted a national survey of radiation oncologists (ROs) and urologists (UROs) to elucidate perceived barriers to AS for low-risk PCa.

Methods

In 2017, we undertook a four-wave mail survey of 1855 ROs and UROs. The survey instrument assessed attitudes about possible barriers towards AS for low-risk PCa. We used Pearson Chi square and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify physician characteristics associated with attitudes about AS.

Results

We received 691 completed surveys for an overall response rate of 37.3%. A majority of respondents indicated that they felt comfortable recommending AS (90.0%), agreed that high-level evidence supports it (82.3%), and considered AS equally effective for survival compared with surgery and radiation therapy (84.4%). UROs were less likely to agree that patients were not interested in AS for low-risk PCa compared with ROs (16.5 vs. 48.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.18, p < 0.001). Similarly, UROs were less likely to concur patients avoid AS because of repeat prostate biopsies than ROs (36.3 vs. 55.4%; adjusted OR 0.41, p < 0.001). ROs and UROs were more likely to agree that patients preferred treatments delivered by the respondent’s specialty.

Conclusions

Physician perceptions of patient lack of interest in AS, need for repeat prostate biopsies, and biases of patient treatment preferences in favor of their own specialty treatments represent key barriers to AS. Shared decision making may be a meaningful approach to engaging patients in conversations about treatment decisions.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Welch HG, Albertsen PC. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen screening: 1986–2005. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(19):1325–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Welch HG, Albertsen PC. Prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen screening: 1986–2005. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(19):1325–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, et al. Prostate cancer, Version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2016;14(1):19–30.CrossRefPubMed Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, et al. Prostate cancer, Version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2016;14(1):19–30.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–29.CrossRefPubMed Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–29.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby MS, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part 1: risk stratification, shared decision making, and care options. J Urol. 2018;199(3):683–90.CrossRefPubMed Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby MS, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part 1: risk stratification, shared decision making, and care options. J Urol. 2018;199(3):683–90.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1425–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1425–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1415–24.CrossRefPubMed Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1415–24.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
go back to reference Tosoian JJ, Mamawala M, Epstein JI, et al. Intermediate and longer-term outcomes from a prospective active-surveillance program for favorable-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(30):3379–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tosoian JJ, Mamawala M, Epstein JI, et al. Intermediate and longer-term outcomes from a prospective active-surveillance program for favorable-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(30):3379–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, et al. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):272–77.CrossRefPubMed Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, et al. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):272–77.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;62(6):976–83.CrossRefPubMed Dall’Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;62(6):976–83.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P. Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2013;190(5):1742–9.CrossRefPubMed Loeb S, Berglund A, Stattin P. Population based study of use and determinants of active surveillance and watchful waiting for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2013;190(5):1742–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Maurice MJ, Abouassaly R, Kim SP, Zhu H. Contemporary nationwide patterns of active surveillance use for prostate cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(9):1569–71.CrossRefPubMed Maurice MJ, Abouassaly R, Kim SP, Zhu H. Contemporary nationwide patterns of active surveillance use for prostate cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(9):1569–71.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Krishna S, Fan Y, Jarosek S, Adejoro O, Chamie K, Konety B. Racial disparities in active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2017;197(2):342–9.CrossRefPubMed Krishna S, Fan Y, Jarosek S, Adejoro O, Chamie K, Konety B. Racial disparities in active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2017;197(2):342–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Womble PR, Montie JE, Ye Z, et al. Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;67(1):44–50.CrossRefPubMed Womble PR, Montie JE, Ye Z, et al. Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;67(1):44–50.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Taylor KL, Hoffman RM, Davis KM, et al. Treatment preferences for active surveillance versus active treatment among men with low-risk prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prevent. 2016;25(8):1240–50.CrossRef Taylor KL, Hoffman RM, Davis KM, et al. Treatment preferences for active surveillance versus active treatment among men with low-risk prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prevent. 2016;25(8):1240–50.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Shen MJ, Nelson CJ, Peters E, et al. Decision-making processes among prostate cancer survivors with rising PSA levels: results from a qualitative analysis. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(4):477–86.CrossRefPubMed Shen MJ, Nelson CJ, Peters E, et al. Decision-making processes among prostate cancer survivors with rising PSA levels: results from a qualitative analysis. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(4):477–86.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kim SP, Gross CP, Nguyen PL, et al. Perceptions of active surveillance and treatment recommendations for low-risk prostate cancer: results from a National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists. Med Care. 2014;52(7):579–85.CrossRefPubMed Kim SP, Gross CP, Nguyen PL, et al. Perceptions of active surveillance and treatment recommendations for low-risk prostate cancer: results from a National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists. Med Care. 2014;52(7):579–85.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kinsella N, Stattin P, Cahill D, et al. Factors influencing men’s choice of and adherence to active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a mixed-method systematic review. Eur Urol. 2018;74(3):261–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kinsella N, Stattin P, Cahill D, et al. Factors influencing men’s choice of and adherence to active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: a mixed-method systematic review. Eur Urol. 2018;74(3):261–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Davison BJ, Breckon E. Factors influencing treatment decision making and information preferences of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;87(3):369–74.CrossRefPubMed Davison BJ, Breckon E. Factors influencing treatment decision making and information preferences of prostate cancer patients on active surveillance. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;87(3):369–74.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Mishra MV, Bennett M, Vincent A, et al. Identifying barriers to patient acceptance of active surveillance: content analysis of online patient communications. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(9):e68563.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mishra MV, Bennett M, Vincent A, et al. Identifying barriers to patient acceptance of active surveillance: content analysis of online patient communications. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(9):e68563.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Scherr KA, Fagerlin A, Hofer T, et al. Physician recommendations trump patient preferences in prostate cancer treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2017;37(1):56–69.CrossRefPubMed Scherr KA, Fagerlin A, Hofer T, et al. Physician recommendations trump patient preferences in prostate cancer treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2017;37(1):56–69.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Kim SP, Gross CP, Nguyen PL, et al. Specialty bias in treatment recommendations and quality of life among radiation oncologists and urologists for localized prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014;17(2):163–9.CrossRefPubMed Kim SP, Gross CP, Nguyen PL, et al. Specialty bias in treatment recommendations and quality of life among radiation oncologists and urologists for localized prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2014;17(2):163–9.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Lin GA, Aaronson DS, Knight SJ, Carroll PR, Dudley RA. Patient decision aids for prostate cancer treatment: a systematic review of the literature. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59(6):379–90.CrossRefPubMed Lin GA, Aaronson DS, Knight SJ, Carroll PR, Dudley RA. Patient decision aids for prostate cancer treatment: a systematic review of the literature. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59(6):379–90.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Violette PD, Agoritsas T, Alexander P, et al. Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(3):239–51.CrossRefPubMed Violette PD, Agoritsas T, Alexander P, et al. Decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(3):239–51.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Johnson DC, Mueller DE, Deal AM, et al. Integrating patient preference into treatment decisions for men with prostate cancer at the point of care. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1640–44.CrossRefPubMed Johnson DC, Mueller DE, Deal AM, et al. Integrating patient preference into treatment decisions for men with prostate cancer at the point of care. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1640–44.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Makarov DV, Chrouser K, Gore JK, et al. AUA White paper on implementation of shared decision making into urolgoical practice. Urol Pract. 2016;3:355–63.CrossRef Makarov DV, Chrouser K, Gore JK, et al. AUA White paper on implementation of shared decision making into urolgoical practice. Urol Pract. 2016;3:355–63.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Adsul P, Wray R, Spradling K, Darwish O, Weaver N, Siddiqui S. Systematic review of decision aids for newly diagnosed patients with prostate cancer making treatment decisions. J Urol. 2015;194(5):1247–52.CrossRefPubMed Adsul P, Wray R, Spradling K, Darwish O, Weaver N, Siddiqui S. Systematic review of decision aids for newly diagnosed patients with prostate cancer making treatment decisions. J Urol. 2015;194(5):1247–52.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Wang EH, Gross CP, Tilburt JC, et al. Shared decision making and use of decision AIDS for localized prostate cancer: perceptions from radiation oncologists and urologists. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(5):792–99.CrossRefPubMed Wang EH, Gross CP, Tilburt JC, et al. Shared decision making and use of decision AIDS for localized prostate cancer: perceptions from radiation oncologists and urologists. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(5):792–99.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part I: risk stratification, shared decision making, and care options. J Urol. 2017. Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part I: risk stratification, shared decision making, and care options. J Urol. 2017.
31.
go back to reference Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part II: recommended approaches and details of specific care options. J Urol. 2018;199(4):990–7.CrossRefPubMed Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part II: recommended approaches and details of specific care options. J Urol. 2018;199(4):990–7.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Elwyn G, O’Connor AM, Bennett C, et al. Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS ONE. 2009;4(3):e4705.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Elwyn G, O’Connor AM, Bennett C, et al. Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS ONE. 2009;4(3):e4705.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Blumenthal-Barby JS, Cantor SB, Russell HV, Naik AD, Volk RJ. Decision aids: when ‘nudging’ patients to make a particular choice is more ethical than balanced, nondirective content. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(2):303–10.CrossRefPubMed Blumenthal-Barby JS, Cantor SB, Russell HV, Naik AD, Volk RJ. Decision aids: when ‘nudging’ patients to make a particular choice is more ethical than balanced, nondirective content. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(2):303–10.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Ehdaie B, Assel M, Benfante N, Malhotra D, Vickers A. A systematic approach to discussing active surveillance with patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(6):866–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ehdaie B, Assel M, Benfante N, Malhotra D, Vickers A. A systematic approach to discussing active surveillance with patients with low-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(6):866–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(10):1129–36.CrossRefPubMed Asch DA, Jedrziewski MK, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(10):1129–36.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Perceptions of Barriers Towards Active Surveillance for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From a National Survey of Radiation Oncologists and Urologists
Authors
Simon P. Kim
Cary P. Gross
Nilay D. Shah
Jon. C. Tilburt
Badrinath Konety
Stephen B. Williams
Christopher J. Weight
James B. Yu
Aryavarta M. S. Kumar
Neal J. Meropol
Publication date
01-02-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6863-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2019 Go to the issue