Preferences of hxealthy men for two different endocrine treatment options offered for locally advanced prostate cancer
- 19 July 2005
- journal article
- Published by Informa UK Limited in Current Medical Research and Opinion
- Vol. 21 (9), 1329-1335
- https://doi.org/10.1185/030079905x59058
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine whether healthy men would prefer either luteinizing hormone releasing hormone analogues (LHRHa) or non-steroidal anti-androgen therapy (NSAA) should they hypothetically develop locally advanced prostate cancer. A representative sample of 180 men without prostate cancer (68% over 65 years of age, range 50-90 years), read two scenarios describing LHRHa or NSAA treatments for locally advanced prostate cancer. Participants chose which drug treatment they hypothetically would prefer, gave a reason for their choice and indicated the degree to which they wanted to avoid side effects specific to each drug. Eighty-six per cent (156/180) of the men chose NSAA therapy, 7% (12/180) chose LHRHa therapy and 7% (12/180) could not decide. The main reason men chose LHRHa therapy was because of the method of administration (9/12) whereas those who chose NSAA therapy cited avoidance of the side effects associated with LHRHa treatment (115/156). The side effects, ranked in order of importance, that men who chose NSAA therapy most wanted to avoid included risk of potential fractures (85%), reduced physical strength (76%), decreased sexual interest (56%), impotence (51%), hot flushes (49%), breast enlargement (17%) and breast tenderness (13%). Although this project was a hypothetical study, several important issues emerged from the data that are relevant to patient choice. Men should be fully informed about the side-effect profiles of different endocrine treatments, involved in decision making and allowed to choose therapies less likely to cause side effects they would prefer to avoid.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Risk of Fracture after Androgen Deprivation for Prostate CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- BICALUTAMIDE 150 MG IN ADDITION TO STANDARD CARE IN PATIENTS WITH LOCALIZED OR LOCALLY ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER: RESULTS FROM THE SECOND ANALYSIS OF THE EARLY PROSTATE CANCER PROGRAM AT MEDIAN FOLLOWUP OF 5.4 YEARSJournal of Urology, 2004
- Prophylactic breast irradiation with a single dose of electron beam radiotherapy (10 Gy) significantly reduces the incidence of bicalutamide-induced gynecomastiaInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics, 2004
- Bicalutamide Monotherapy Versus Leuprolide Monotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Effects on Bone Mineral Density and Body CompositionJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2004
- Informational needs of men with prostate cancer on hormonal manipulation therapyPatient Education and Counseling, 2003
- Bicalutamide Monotherapy versus Flutamide plus Goserelin in Prostate Cancer: Updated Results of a Multicentric TrialEuropean Urology, 2002
- PROGRESSIVE OSTEOPOROSIS DURING ANDROGEN DEPRIVATION THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCERJournal of Urology, 2000
- Effective communication skills are the key to good cancer careEuropean Journal Of Cancer, 1999
- Bicalutamide Monotherapy Versus Flutamide Plus Goserelin in Prostate Cancer Patients: Results of an Italian Prostate Cancer Project StudyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
- Zoladex as Primary Therapy in Advanced Pro static Cancer A French Cooperative TrialAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1988