A longitudinal study of coping strategies in men receiving radiotherapy and neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation for prostate cancer: a quantitative and qualitative study.

Aim: This paper reports a study on how men cope with the side-effects of radiotherapy and neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation for prostate cancer up to 1 year after treatment.

Background: With early detection and improved treatments, prostate cancer survivors are living longer with the disease and the side-effects of treatment. How they cope affects their long-term physical and mental health.

Design: A prospective, longitudinal, exploratory design using both qualitative and quantitative methods was used in this study.

Method: Between September 2006–September 2007 149 men who were about to undergo radical radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation for localized prostate cancer in Northern Ireland were recruited to the study. They completed the Brief Cope scale at four time-points.

Results: Acceptance, positive reframing, emotional support, planning and, just getting on with it, were the most common ways of coping. Fewer men used coping strategies less at 6 months and 1 year after radiotherapy in comparison to pre-treatment and 4–6 weeks after radiotherapy. Interviews with these men demonstrated that men adapted to a new norm, with the support of their wives/partners and did not readily seek professional help. A minority of men used alcohol, behavioural disengagement and self blame as ways of coping.

Conclusion: Men used a variety of ways of coping to help them deal with radiotherapy and neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation for up to 12 months after radiotherapy. Interventions need to be developed to take account of the specific needs of partners of men with prostate cancer and single men who have prostate cancer.

Advantages and limitations of navigation-based multicriteria optimization (MCO) for localized prostate cancer IMRT planning

Efficacy of inverse planning is becoming increasingly important for advanced radiotherapy techniques. This study's aims were to validate multicriteria optimization (MCO) in RayStation (v2.4, RaySearch Laboratories, Sweden) against standard intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization in Oncentra (v4.1, Nucletron BV, the Netherlands) and characterize dose differences due to conversion of navigated MCO plans into deliverable multileaf collimator apertures. Step-and-shoot IMRT plans were created for 10 patients with localized prostate cancer using both standard optimization and MCO. Acceptable standard IMRT plans with minimal average rectal dose were chosen for comparison with deliverable MCO plans. The trade-off was, for the MCO plans, managed through a user interface that permits continuous navigation between fluence-based plans. Navigated MCO plans were made deliverable at incremental steps along a trajectory between maximal target homogeneity and maximal rectal sparing. Dosimetric differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans were also quantified. MCO plans, chosen as acceptable under navigated and deliverable conditions resulted in similar rectal sparing compared with standard optimization (33.7 ± 1.8Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2Gy, p = 0.117). The dose differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans increased as higher priority was placed on rectal avoidance. If the best possible deliverable MCO was chosen, a significant reduction in rectal dose was observed in comparison with standard optimization (30.6 ± 1.4Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2Gy, p = 0.047). Improvements were, however, to some extent, at the expense of less conformal dose distributions, which resulted in significantly higher doses to the bladder for 2 of the 3 tolerance levels. In conclusion, similar IMRT plans can be created for patients with prostate cancer using MCO compared with standard optimization. Limitations exist within MCO regarding conversion of navigated plans to deliverable apertures, particularly for plans that emphasize avoidance of critical structures. Minimizing these differences would result in better quality treatments for patients with prostate cancer who were treated with radiotherapy using MCO plans.

Drugs affecting the renin-angiotensin system and survival from cancer: a population based study of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer patient cohorts

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to the growing number of cancer patients (more than two million in the UK alone) often to treat hypertension. However, increased fatal cancer in ARB users in a randomized trial and increased breast cancer recurrence rates in ACEI users in a recent observational study have raised concerns about their safety in cancer patients. We investigated whether ACEI or ARB use after breast, colorectal or prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific mortality.

Methods: Population-based cohorts of 9,814 breast, 4,762 colorectal and 6,339 prostate cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2006 were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registry linkage. Cancer-specific and all-cause mortality were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data in 2011 (allowing up to 13 years of follow-up). A nested case–control analysis was conducted to compare ACEI/ARB use (from general practitioner prescription records) in cancer patients dying from cancer with up to five controls (not dying from cancer). Conditional logistic regression estimated the risk of cancer-specific, and all-cause, death in ACEI/ARB users compared with non-users.

Results: The main analysis included 1,435 breast, 1,511 colorectal and 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths (and 7,106 breast, 7,291 colorectal and 5,849 prostate cancer controls). There was no increase in cancer-specific mortality in patients using ARBs after diagnosis of breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 1.35), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.82 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.79 95% CI 0.61, 1.03). There was also no evidence of increases in cancer-specific mortality with ACEI use for breast (adjusted OR = 1.06 95% CI 0.89, 1.27), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92).

Conclusions: Overall, we found no evidence of increased risks of cancer-specific mortality in breast, colorectal or prostate cancer patients who used ACEI or ARBs after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that these medications are safe in patients diagnosed with these cancers.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Breast cancer; Prostate cancer; Mortality; Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers

Low-dose aspirin and survival in men with prostate cancer: a study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink

Purpose: Aspirin use is associated with reduced risk of, and death from, prostate cancer. Our aim was to determine whether low-dose aspirin use after a prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with reduced prostate cancer-specific mortality.

Methods: A cohort of newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients (1998–2006) was identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (confirmed by cancer registry linkage). A nested case–control analysis was conducted using conditional logistic regression to compare aspirin usage in cases (prostate cancer deaths) with up to three controls (matched by age and year of diagnosis).

Results: Post-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use was identified in 52 % of 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths and 39 % of 3,531 matched controls (unadjusted OR 1.51, 95 % CI 1.19, 1.90; p < 0.001). After adjustment for confounders including treatment and comorbidities, this association was attenuated (adjusted OR 1.02 95 % CI 0.78, 1.34; p = 0.86). Adjustment for estrogen therapy accounted for the majority of this attenuation. There was also no evidence of dose–response association after adjustments. Compared with no use, patients with 1–11 prescriptions and 12 or more prescriptions had adjusted ORs of 1.07 (95 % CI 0.78, 1.47; p = 0.66) and 0.97 (95 % CI 0.69, 1.37; p = 0.88), respectively. There was no evidence of a protective association between low-dose aspirin use in the year prior to diagnosis and prostate cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR 1.04 95 % CI 0.89, 1.22; p = 0.60).

Conclusion: We found no evidence of an association between low-dose aspirin use before or after diagnosis and risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality, after potential confounders were accounted for, in UK prostate cancer patients.

Beta-blocker usage and prostate cancer survival:A nested case-control study in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink cohort

Background: Recent laboratory and epidemiological evidence suggests that beta-blockers could inhibit prostate cancer progression. Methods: We investigated the effect of beta-blockers on prostate cancer-specific mortality in a cohort of prostate cancer patients. Prostate cancer patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2006 were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Database and confirmed by cancer registries. Patients were followed up to 2011 with deaths identified by the Office of National Statistics. A nested case-control analysis compared patients dying from prostate cancer (cases) with up to three controls alive at the time of their death, matched by age and year of diagnosis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression. Results: Post-diagnostic beta-blocker use was identified in 25% of 1184 prostate cancer-specific deaths and 26% of 3531 matched controls. There was little evidence (P=0.40) of a reduction in the risk of cancer-specific death in beta-blocker users compared with non-users (OR=0.94 95% CI 0.81, 1.09). Similar results were observed after adjustments for confounders, in analyses by beta-blocker frequency, duration, type and for all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Beta-blocker usage after diagnosis was not associated with cancer-specific or all-cause mortality in prostate cancer patients in this large UK study.

Repackaging Prostate Cancer Support Group Research Findings: An e-KT Case Study

n the context of psychosocial oncology research, disseminating study findings to a range of knowledge “end-users” can advance the well-being of diverse patient subgroups and their families. This article details how findings drawn from a study of prostate cancer support groups were repackaged in a knowledge translation website—www.prostatecancerhelpyourself.ubc.ca—using Web 2.0 features. Detailed are five lessons learned from developing the website: the importance of pitching a winning but feasible idea, keeping a focus on interactivity and minimizing text, negotiating with the supplier, building in formal pretests or a pilot test with end-users, and completing formative evaluations based on data collected through Google™ and YouTube™ Analytics. The details are shared to guide the e-knowledge translation efforts of other psychosocial oncology researchers and clinicians.