Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Cancer Education 3/2019

01-06-2019

Prostate Cancer Patients’ Understanding of the Gleason Scoring System: Implications for Shared Decision-Making

Authors: Erin K. Tagai, Suzanne M. Miller, Alexander Kutikov, Michael A. Diefenbach, Ronak A. Gor, Tahseen Al-Saleem, David Y. T. Chen, Sara Fleszar, Gem Roy

Published in: Journal of Cancer Education | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

The Gleason scoring system is a key component of a prostate cancer diagnosis, since it indicates disease aggressiveness. It also serves as a risk communication tool that facilitates shared treatment decision-making. However, the system is highly complex and therefore difficult to communicate: factors which have been shown to undermine well-informed and high-quality shared treatment decision-making. To systematically explore prostate cancer patients’ understanding of the Gleason scoring system (GSS), we assessed knowledge and perceived importance among men who had completed treatment (N = 50). Patients were administered a survey that assessed patient knowledge and patients’ perceived importance of the GSS, as well as demographics, medical factors (e.g., Gleason score at diagnosis), and health literacy. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify associations with patient knowledge and perceived importance of the GSS. The sample was generally well-educated (48% with a bachelor’s degree or higher) and health literate (M = 12.9, SD = 2.2, range = 3–15). Despite this, patient knowledge of the GSS was low (M = 1.8, SD = 1.4, range = 14). Patients’ understanding of the importance of the GSS was moderate (M = 2.8, SD = 1.0, range = 0–4) and was positively associated with GSS knowledge (p < .01). Additionally, GSS knowledge was negatively associated with years since biopsy (p < .05). Age and health literacy were positively associated with patients’ perceived importance of the GSS (p < .05), but not with GSS knowledge. Patient knowledge is thus less than optimal and would benefit from enhanced communication to maximize shared treatment decision-making. Future studies are needed to explore the potential utility of a simplified Gleason grading system and improved patient-provider communication.
Literature
4.
go back to reference McDougal, W Scott, Alan J Wein, Louis R Kavoussi, Andrew C Novick, Alan W Partin, Craig A Peters, and Parvati Ramchandani (2011) Campbell-Walsh urology 10th edition review. Elsevier Health Sciences McDougal, W Scott, Alan J Wein, Louis R Kavoussi, Andrew C Novick, Alan W Partin, Craig A Peters, and Parvati Ramchandani (2011) Campbell-Walsh urology 10th edition review. Elsevier Health Sciences
7.
go back to reference Ozok HU, Sagnak L, Tuygun C, Oktay M, Karakoyunlu N, Ersoy H, Murat Alper (2009) Will the modification of the Gleason grading system affect the urology practice? Int J Surg Pathol Ozok HU, Sagnak L, Tuygun C, Oktay M, Karakoyunlu N, Ersoy H, Murat Alper (2009) Will the modification of the Gleason grading system affect the urology practice? Int J Surg Pathol
8.
11.
go back to reference Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ (2004) Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med 36(8):588–594PubMed Chew LD, Bradley KA, Boyko EJ (2004) Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med 36(8):588–594PubMed
17.
go back to reference Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, Vickers AJ, Parwani AV, Reuter VE, Fine SW, Eastham JA, Wiklund P, Han M, Reddy CA, Ciezki JP, Nyberg T, Klein EA (2016) A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol 69(3):428–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.046. CrossRef Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, Vickers AJ, Parwani AV, Reuter VE, Fine SW, Eastham JA, Wiklund P, Han M, Reddy CA, Ciezki JP, Nyberg T, Klein EA (2016) A contemporary prostate cancer grading system: a validated alternative to the Gleason score. Eur Urol 69(3):428–435. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2015.​06.​046.​ CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 40(2):244–252. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000530. CrossRef Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol 40(2):244–252. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1097/​pas.​0000000000000530​.​ CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Colella KM, DeLuca G (2004) Shared decision making in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a model for treatment education and support. Urol Nurs 24(3):187–191 195-186PubMed Colella KM, DeLuca G (2004) Shared decision making in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a model for treatment education and support. Urol Nurs 24(3):187–191 195-186PubMed
Metadata
Title
Prostate Cancer Patients’ Understanding of the Gleason Scoring System: Implications for Shared Decision-Making
Authors
Erin K. Tagai
Suzanne M. Miller
Alexander Kutikov
Michael A. Diefenbach
Ronak A. Gor
Tahseen Al-Saleem
David Y. T. Chen
Sara Fleszar
Gem Roy
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0885-8195
Electronic ISSN: 1543-0154
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-018-1320-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Journal of Cancer Education 3/2019 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine