Background There are several treatments available to newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCA) patients. Although surgery and radiotherapy (RT) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are widely adopted treatment options for localized PCA together with active surveillance (AS), there is no consensus nor randomised trials on treatment selection, prospective quality of life (QOL), along with toxicity outcomes and according to treatment modality in the Italian population. The current study aimed to describe clinical-therapeutic features and QOL at PCA diagnosis, according to different treatment patterns in a large prospective, Italian population, enrolled in the Pros-IT CNR study. Methods The Pros-IT CNR is an on-going national, multicenter, observational, prospective study on patients affected by PCA who have been referred by 97 Italian Urology, Radiation Oncology and Medical Oncology facilities participating in the project. The possible relationships between the treatment patterns reported in the 6 month follow-up case report form and patients’ features at diagnosis were evaluated using exploratory multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and other data analysis method. Results At diagnosis, surgery and AS patients were significantly younger, had fewer comorbidities, lower PSA levels and Gleason Score (GS) values; they were also diagnosed at an earlier stage of disease with respect to the RT or ADT patients who showed significantly worse QoL scores at the time of diagnosis. Conclusions An analysis of the data collected at baseline and 6 months later uncovered substantial differences in ages, comorbidities, clinical and QOL features in the various treatment groups. These findings do not fully reflect the current PCA treatment guidelines and suggest the need for a multidisciplinary consensus guideline to ameliorate both the counselling and treatments of PCA patients.
Treatment paths for localised prostate cancer in Italy: The results of a multidisciplinary, observational, prospective study (Pros-IT CNR) / Buglione, M.; Noale, M.; Bruni, A.; Antonelli, A.; Bertoni, F.; Corvo, R.; Ricardi, U.; Borghetti, P.; Maddalo, M.; Simeone, C.; Mazzeo, E.; Porreca, A.; Serni, S.; Bassi, P.; Gacci, M.; Mirone, V.; Montironi, R.; Tubaro, A.; Berruti, A.; Conti, G. N.; Maggi, S.; Magrini, S. M.; Triggiani, L.; Crepaldi, G.; Artibani, W.; Bracarda, S.; Graziotti, P.; Russi, E.; Muto, G.; Pecoraro, S.; Zagonel, V.; Alitto, A. R.; Ambrosi, E.; Aristei, C.; Bardari, F.; Bardoscia, L.; Barra, S.; Bartoncini, S.; Basso, U.; Becherini, C.; Bellavita, R.; Bergamaschi, F.; Berlingheri, S.; Borghesi, M.; Bortolus, R.; Borzillo, V.; Bosetti, D.; Bove, G.; Bove, P.; Brausi, M.; Bruno, G.; Brunocilla, E.; Buffoli, A.; Buttigliero, C.; Cacciamani, G.; Caldiroli, M.; Cardo, G.; Carmignani, G.; Carrieri, G.; Castelli, E.; Castrezzati, E.; Catalano, G.; Cattarino, S.; Catucci, F.; Cavallini, F. D.; Ceccarini, O.; Celia, A.; Chiancone, F.; Chini, T.; Cianci, C.; Cisternino, A.; Collura, D.; Corbella, F.; Corinti, M.; Corsi, P.; Cortese, F.; Corti, L.; de Nunzio, C.; Cristiano, O.; D'Angelillo, R. M.; Da Pozzo, L.; D'Agostino, D.; D'Elia, C.; Dandrea, M.; De Angelis, M.; De Angelis, P.; De Cobelli, O.; De Concilio, B.; De Lisa, A.; De Luca, S.; De Stefani, A.; Deantoni, C. L.; Degli, E. C.; Destito, A.; Detti, B.; Di Muzio, N.; Di Stasio, A.; Di Stefano, C.; Di Trapani, D.; Difino, G.; Falivene, S.; Farullo, G.; Fedelini, P.; Ferrari, I.; Ferrau, F.; Ferro, M.; Fodor, A.; Fontana, F.; Francesca, F.; Francolini, G.; Frata, P.; Frezza, G.; Gabriele, P.; Galeandro, M.; Garibaldi, E.; Gennari, P. G.; Gentilucci, A.; Giacobbe, A.; Giussani, L.; Giusti, G.; Gontero, P.; Guarneri, A.; Guida, C.; Gurioli, A.; Huqi, D.; Imbimbo, C.; Ingrosso, G.; Iotti, C.; Italia, C.; La Mattina, P.; La Rocca, R.; Lamanna, E.; Lastrucci, L.; Lazzari, G.; Liberale, F.; Liguori, G.; Lisi, R.; Lohr, F.; Lombardo, R.; Lovisolo, J. A. J.; Ludovico, G. M.; Macchione, N.; Maggio, F.; Malizia, M.; Manasse, G.; Mandoliti, G.; Mantini, G.; Marafioti, L.; Marciello, L.; Marconi, A. M.; Martilotta, A.; Marzano, S.; Masciullo, S.; Maso, G.; Massenzo, A.; Mearini, L.; Medoro, S.; Mole, R.; Monesi, G.; Montanari, E.; Montefiore, F.; Montesi, G.; Morgia, G.; Moro, G.; Muscas, G.; Musio, D.; Muto, P.; Muzzonigro, G.; Napodano, G.; Negro, C. L. A.; Nidini, M.; Ntreta, M.; Orsatti, M.; Palazzolo, C.; Palumbo, I.; Parisi, A.; Parma, P.; Pavan, N.; Pericolini, M.; Pinto, F.; Pistone, A.; Pizzuti, V.; Platania, A.; Polli, C.; Pomara, G.; Ponti, E.; Porcaro, A. B.; Porpiglia, F.; Pugliese, D.; Pycha, A.; Raguso, G.; Rampini, A.; Randone, D. F.; Roboldi, V.; Roscigno, M.; Ruggieri, M. P.; Ruoppo, G.; Sanseverino, R.; Santacaterina, A.; Santarsieri, M.; Santoni, R.; Scagliarini, S.; Scagliotti, G. V.; Scanzi, M.; Scarcia, M.; Schiavina, R.; Sciarra, A.; Sciorio, C.; Scolaro, T.; Scuzzarella, S.; Selvaggio, O.; Serao, A.; Signor, M. A.; Silvani, M.; Silvano, G.; Silvestris, F.; Simone, V.; Spagnoletti, G.; Spinelli, M. G.; Squillace, L.; Tombolini, V.; Toninelli, M.; Trinchieri, A.; Trodella, L. E.; Trodella, L.; Trombetta, C.; Tronnolone, L.; Tucci, M.; Urzi, D.; Valdagni, R.; Valeriani, M.; Vanoli, M.; Vitali, E.; Volpe, A.; Zaramella, S.; Zeccolini, G.; Zini, G.. - In: PLOS ONE. - ISSN 1932-6203. - 14:11(2019), p. e0224151. [10.1371/journal.pone.0224151]
Treatment paths for localised prostate cancer in Italy: The results of a multidisciplinary, observational, prospective study (Pros-IT CNR)
Mirone V.;Chiancone F.;Imbimbo C.;La Rocca R.;Lisi R.;
2019
Abstract
Background There are several treatments available to newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCA) patients. Although surgery and radiotherapy (RT) with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) are widely adopted treatment options for localized PCA together with active surveillance (AS), there is no consensus nor randomised trials on treatment selection, prospective quality of life (QOL), along with toxicity outcomes and according to treatment modality in the Italian population. The current study aimed to describe clinical-therapeutic features and QOL at PCA diagnosis, according to different treatment patterns in a large prospective, Italian population, enrolled in the Pros-IT CNR study. Methods The Pros-IT CNR is an on-going national, multicenter, observational, prospective study on patients affected by PCA who have been referred by 97 Italian Urology, Radiation Oncology and Medical Oncology facilities participating in the project. The possible relationships between the treatment patterns reported in the 6 month follow-up case report form and patients’ features at diagnosis were evaluated using exploratory multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and other data analysis method. Results At diagnosis, surgery and AS patients were significantly younger, had fewer comorbidities, lower PSA levels and Gleason Score (GS) values; they were also diagnosed at an earlier stage of disease with respect to the RT or ADT patients who showed significantly worse QoL scores at the time of diagnosis. Conclusions An analysis of the data collected at baseline and 6 months later uncovered substantial differences in ages, comorbidities, clinical and QOL features in the various treatment groups. These findings do not fully reflect the current PCA treatment guidelines and suggest the need for a multidisciplinary consensus guideline to ameliorate both the counselling and treatments of PCA patients.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
pone.0224151.pdf
accesso aperto
Licenza:
Dominio pubblico
Dimensione
1.2 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.2 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
