A randomised trial of robotic and open prostatectomy in men with localised prostate cancer

Background: Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer in the Western world however there is ongoing debate about the optimal treatment strategy for localised disease. While surgery remains the most commonly received treatment for localised disease in Australia more recently a robotic approach has emerged as an alternative to open and laparoscopic surgery. However, high level data is not yet available to support this as a superior approach or to guide treatment decision making between the alternatives. This paper presents the design of a randomised trial of Robotic and Open Prostatectomy for men newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer that seeks to answer this question.Methods/design: 200 men per treatment arm (400 men in total) are being recruited after diagnosis and before treatment through a major public hospital outpatient clinic and randomised to 1) Robotic Prostatectomy or 2) Open Prostatectomy. All robotic prostatectomies are being performed by one surgeon and all open prostatectomies are being performed by one other surgeon. Outcomes are being measured pre-operatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months post-surgery. Oncological outcomes are being related to positive surgical margins, biochemical recurrence +/- the need for further treatment. Non-oncological outcome measures include: pain, physical and mental functioning, fatigue, summary (preference-based utility scores) and domain-specific QoL (urinary incontinence, bowel function and erectile function), cancer specific distress, psychological distress, decision-related distress and time to return to usual activities. Cost modelling of each approach, as well as full economic appraisal, is also being undertaken.Discussion: The study will provide recommendations about the relative benefits of Robotic and Open Prostatectomy to support informed patient decision making about treatment for localised prostate cancer; and to assist in treatment services planning for this patient group.Trial registration: ACTRN12611000661976

Mr. N.M. Wilson of Pennsylvania has paid me for the Ticket of each Professor. Robley Dunglison, Dean. Nov. 9 1865 (verso)

Session 1865-1866https://jdc.jefferson.edu/lecturetickets/2359/thumbnail.jp

Jefferson Medical College of Philadelphia. Lectures on Institutes of Medicine &c. By Professor Dunglison. Admit Mr. Samuel N. Troth (verso)

Session 1846-1847https://jdc.jefferson.edu/lecturetickets/1610/thumbnail.jp

Matriculation. Mr. N.M. Wilson Of the State of Pennsylvania is regularly Matriculated in the Jefferson Medical College, for the Ensuing Session. Philad.a Oct. 19 1864 Robley Dunglison Dean (verso)

Session 1864-1865https://jdc.jefferson.edu/lecturetickets/2361/thumbnail.jp

Jefferson Medical College of Philadlephia. Lectures on Institutes of Medicine &c. By Professor Dunglison. Admit Mr. N.M. Wilson (verso)

Session 1864-1865https://jdc.jefferson.edu/lecturetickets/2351/thumbnail.jp

A prospective study of psychological distress after prostate cancer surgery

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Background: Men treated for prostate cancer experience heightened psychological distress and have an increased risk of suicide. Management of this distress and risk is crucial for quality urological care. Objective: To identify risk indicators for poorer trajectories of psychological adjustment and health-related quality of life (QoL) after surgery for localised prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients were newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer scheduled for surgical treatment. Patients were assessed at baseline (pre-surgery) and 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months post–surgery. Measurements: Assessment measures included sociodemographics, domain-specific and health-related QoL, and psychological distress. Mixed effects regression models were used to analyse the data. Results and Limitations: A total of 233 patients provided data for this analysis (Mage = 60 years, standard deviation [SD] = 4.02; MPSA = 7.37 ng/mL). At baseline, the prevalence of high psychological distress was 28% reducing to 21% at 24 months. Before treatment, younger age, more comorbidities, and worse bowel function were related to greater psychological distress; and younger age and better urinary, sexual, and bowel function were related to better health-related QoL. By contrast, for changes over time, only bowel function was important with better bowel function predicting decreasing psychological distress for men. Conclusions: Regular distress screening is indicated over the 24 months after surgery for localised prostate cancer. Care pathways for men with prostate cancer need also to respond to age-specific concerns and health problems associated with comorbidities in aging men. Focussed symptom control for bowel bother should be a priority