Search

Purpose of the Research: As the number of men living with prostate cancer is increasing worldwide, the requirement for follow up care also grows. This study was undertaken to evaluate nurse-led, telephone follow up, for men with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer treated with radical radiotherapy when compared with medical follow up., Methods and Sample: A non-randomized, two-cohort, comparative study. 169 men diagnosed with prostate cancer were recruited from outpatient clinics at a tertiary cancer centre in Australia. 83 men were recruited to cohort 1 (control) (51 low to intermediate risk; 32 high risk) and 86 to cohort 2 (intervention) (51 low to intermediate risk; 35 high risk). High risk patients, regardless of cohort, received medical follow up. Low to intermediate risk patients in cohort 2 were triaged to nurse-led review for their six month review appointment. Nurse-led follow up consisted of six monthly telephone consultations and PSA testing., Measures: Participants completed the Satisfaction with Consultation Scale, the Brief Distress Thermometer and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite., Key Results: There was no statistically significant difference in patient satisfaction on any of the study measures between the nurse-led and standard medical follow up at six months following treatment completion. However, where there was a trend towards significance (p=0.051), it favoured the nurse-led follow up regimen., Conclusions: Nurse-led telephone consultation provides an acceptable model of follow-up for men diagnosed with low to intermediate risk prostate cancer. Multi-centre randomised controlled trials are needed to support the efficacy of nurse-led, telephone follow up services., (Crown Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) increases the accuracy of treatment delivery through daily target localisation. We report on toxicity symptoms experienced during radiotherapy treatment, with and without IGRT in prostate cancer patients treated radically., Methods: Between 2006 and 2009, acute toxicity data for ten symptoms were collected prospectively onto standardized assessment forms. Toxicity was scored during radiotherapy, according to the Common Terminology Criteria Adverse Events V3.0, for 275 prostate cancer patients before and after the implementation of a fiducial marker IGRT program and dose escalation from 74 Gy in 37 fractions, to 78 Gy in 39 fractions. Margins and planning constraints were maintained the same during the study period. The symptoms scored were urinary frequency, cystitis, bladder spasm, urinary incontinence, urinary retention, diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, proctitis, anal skin discomfort and fatigue. Analysis was conducted for the maximum grade of toxicity and the median number of days from the onset of that toxicity to the end of treatment., Results: In the IGRT group, 14228 toxicity scores were analysed from 249 patients. In the non-IGRT group, 1893 toxicity scores were analysed from 26 patients. Urinary frequency ≥G3 affected 23% and 7% in the non-IGRT and IGRT group respectively (p = 0.0188). Diarrhoea ≥G2 affected 15% and 3% of patients in the non-IGRT and IGRT groups (p = 0.0174). Fatigue ≥G2 affected 23% and 8% of patients in the non-IGRT and IGRT groups (p = 0.0271). The median number of days with a toxicity was higher for ≥G2 (p = 0.0179) and ≥G3 frequency (p = 0.0027), ≥G2 diarrhoea (p = 0.0033) and ≥G2 fatigue (p = 0.0088) in the non-IGRT group compared to the IGRT group. Other toxicities were not of significant statistical difference., Conclusions: In this study, prostate cancer patients treated radically with IGRT had less severe urinary frequency, diarrhoea and fatigue during treatment compared to patients treated with non-IGRT. Onset of these symptoms was earlier in the non-IGRT group. IGRT results in less acute toxicity during radiotherapy in prostate cancer.